H2H data updated: 2026-07-14 19:16 UTC
Nicolas Lapentti vs Tomas Zib H2H: 2-0
Nicolas Lapentti holds a 2–0 lead over Tomas Zib in their ATP head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Nicolas Lapentti leads 2–0 on clay. Most recently, Nicolas Lapentti won the 2006 Kitzbuhel second round 7-6(10) 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.
ECU
Age 49
Right-Handed
188 cm / 6'2"
H2H
2
–
0
2 main draw meetings
CZE
Age 50
Right-Handed
178 cm / 5'10"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 26, 2006* | Kitzbuhel | ATP 250 | R64 | Clay | Nicolas Lapentti | 7-6(10) 6-3 | Tomas Zib | Match data |
| Apr 21, 2005* | Houston | ATP 250 | R32 | Clay | Nicolas Lapentti | 6-3 6-2 | Tomas Zib | 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 |
| Tomas Zib | #1,339 | #51 | 688 | 1,636 | 41 | 94 | 30.4% | 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 | Tomas Zib | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 22 | 1999 | 52–24 | 68.4% | #8 | 1,883 | 0 | 3 | 1998 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #172 | 1,487 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2000 | 40–28 | 58.8% | #24 | 1,755 | 0 | 3 | 1999 | 4–4 | 50.0% | #111 | 1,531 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2001 | 30–22 | 57.7% | #23 | 1,837 | 0 | 4 | 2000 | 5–13 | 27.8% | #117 | 1,465 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2002 | 32–27 | 54.2% | #29 | 1,714 | 0 | 5 | 2001 | 3–11 | 21.4% | #224 | 1,438 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2003 | 20–22 | 47.6% | #57 | 1,697 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 27 | 2004 | 7–14 | 33.3% | #122 | 1,600 | 0 | 5 | 2003 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #145 | 1,466 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2005 | 9–16 | 36.0% | #95 | 1,579 | 0 | 5 | 2004 | 3–8 | 27.3% | #121 | 1,482 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2006 | 12–9 | 57.1% | #67 | 1,682 | 0 | 5 | 2005 | 18–27 | 40.0% | #59 | 1,558 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2007 | 10–14 | 41.7% | #109 | 1,611 | 0 | 5 | 2006 | 4–20 | 16.7% | #133 | 1,509 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | 2008 | 14–17 | 45.2% | #86 | 1,658 | 0 | 5 | 2007 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #138 | 1,535 | 0 | 0 |
| 32 | 2009 | 6–14 | 30.0% | #97 | 1,668 | 0 | 5 | 2008 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #416 | 1,546 | 0 | 0 |
| 33 | 2010 | 1–7 | 12.5% | #447 | 1,582 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |