H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 07:16 UTC
Marius Copil vs Henri Laaksonen H2H: 0-1
Henri Laaksonen holds a 1–0 lead over Marius Copil in their ATP head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Henri Laaksonen leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Henri Laaksonen won the 2017 Shenzhen fourth round 4-6 6-4 6-3.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
ROU
Age 35
Right-Handed
193 cm / 6'4"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
SUI
Age 34
Right-Handed
185 cm / 6'1"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 29, 2017* | Shenzhen | ATP 250 | R16 | Hard | Henri Laaksonen | 4-6 6-4 6-3 | Marius Copil | Match data |
| Oct 13, 2014 | Stockholm | ATP 250 | Q1 | Hard | Marius Copil | 7-6(4) 6-4 | Henri Laaksonen | Match data |
| Jul 9, 2013* | Bastad | ATP 250 | Q3 | Clay | Henri Laaksonen | 3-6 7-6(4) 7-6(7) | Marius Copil | Match data |
* Estimated match date where the exact historical date is unavailable.
Career Comparison
| Player | Current | Peak | Pts | Elo | W | L | Win % | GS | 1000 | Finals | 500 | 250 | Titles |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Marius Copil | #1,021 | #56 | 888 | 1,811 | 47 | 81 | 36.7% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Henri Laaksonen | #1,622 | #84 | 798 | 1,830 | 37 | 64 | 36.6% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Career Progression by Age
Seasons are aligned by the age each player spent most of that calendar year. GS and Titles are cumulative career totals through that season.
| Age | Marius Copil | Henri Laaksonen | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 18 | 2009 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #467 | 1,443 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 2010 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #291 | 1,466 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 2011 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #217 | 1,553 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #291 | 1,506 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2012 | 3–3 | 50.0% | #160 | 1,641 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #244 | 1,600 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2013 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #147 | 1,611 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #318 | 1,554 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2014 | 6–6 | 50.0% | #172 | 1,696 | 0 | 0 | 2015 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #181 | 1,551 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2015 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #165 | 1,677 | 0 | 0 | 2016 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #136 | 1,592 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2016 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #132 | 1,737 | 0 | 0 | 2017 | 10–10 | 50.0% | #121 | 1,691 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2017 | 7–14 | 33.3% | #93 | 1,674 | 0 | 0 | 2018 | 5–4 | 55.6% | #169 | 1,643 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2018 | 15–20 | 42.9% | #60 | 1,809 | 0 | 0 | 2019 | 6–8 | 42.9% | #104 | 1,655 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2019 | 7–19 | 26.9% | #153 | 1,705 | 0 | 0 | 2020 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #134 | 1,660 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2021 | 7–8 | 46.7% | #98 | 1,790 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2022 | 3–14 | 17.6% | #172 | 1,543 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | 2022 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #374 | 1,569 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |