H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Nicolas Lapentti vs George Bastl H2H: 1-0
Nicolas Lapentti holds a 1–0 lead over George Bastl in their ATP head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Nicolas Lapentti leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Nicolas Lapentti won the 2000 Shanghai fourth round 6-3 6-2.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
ECU
Age 49
Right-Handed
188 cm / 6'2"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
SUI
Age 51
Right-Handed
183 cm / 6'0"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 29, 2006* | US Open | Grand Slam | Q3 | Hard | George Bastl | 6-3 7-6(11) | Nicolas Lapentti | Match data |
| Oct 20, 2000* | Shanghai | ATP 250 | R16 | Hard | Nicolas Lapentti | 6-3 6-2 | George Bastl | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nicolas Lapentti | #885 | #6 | 2,293 | 1,935 | 282 | 280 | 50.2% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 5 |
| George Bastl | #953 | #71 | 569 | 1,657 | 47 | 85 | 35.6% | 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 | Nicolas Lapentti | George Bastl | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 18 | 1995 | 5–0 | 100.0% | #109 | 1,594 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 1996 | 11–19 | 36.7% | #121 | 1,576 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 1997 | 17–18 | 48.6% | #63 | 1,660 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 21 | 1998 | 16–29 | 35.6% | #90 | 1,596 | 0 | 1 | 1996 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #437 | 1,495 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1999 | 52–24 | 68.4% | #8 | 1,883 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 23 | 2000 | 40–28 | 58.8% | #24 | 1,755 | 0 | 3 | 1998 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #194 | 1,500 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2001 | 30–22 | 57.7% | #23 | 1,837 | 0 | 4 | 1999 | 6–7 | 46.2% | #81 | 1,558 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2002 | 32–27 | 54.2% | #29 | 1,714 | 0 | 5 | 2000 | 15–22 | 40.5% | #105 | 1,612 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2003 | 20–22 | 47.6% | #57 | 1,697 | 0 | 5 | 2001 | 10–15 | 40.0% | #115 | 1,622 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2004 | 7–14 | 33.3% | #122 | 1,600 | 0 | 5 | 2002 | 3–9 | 25.0% | #160 | 1,564 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2005 | 9–16 | 36.0% | #95 | 1,579 | 0 | 5 | 2003 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #277 | 1,499 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2006 | 12–9 | 57.1% | #67 | 1,682 | 0 | 5 | 2004 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #201 | 1,490 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2007 | 10–14 | 41.7% | #109 | 1,611 | 0 | 5 | 2005 | 4–7 | 36.4% | #128 | 1,563 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | 2008 | 14–17 | 45.2% | #86 | 1,658 | 0 | 5 | 2006 | 5–8 | 38.5% | #173 | 1,588 | 0 | 0 |
| 32 | 2009 | 6–14 | 30.0% | #97 | 1,668 | 0 | 5 | 2007 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #464 | 1,522 | 0 | 0 |
| 33 | 2010 | 1–7 | 12.5% | #447 | 1,582 | 0 | 5 | 2008 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #233 | 1,619 | 0 | 0 |
| 34 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2009 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #523 | 1,473 | 0 | 0 |