H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Nikolay Davydenko vs Federico Delbonis H2H: 0-1
Federico Delbonis holds a 1–0 lead over Nikolay Davydenko in their ATP head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Federico Delbonis leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Federico Delbonis won the 2014 Munich third round 6-2 7-6(4).
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
RUS
Age 45
Right-Handed
178 cm / 5'10"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
ARG
Age 35
Left-Handed
193 cm / 6'4"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 1, 2014* | Munich | ATP 250 | R32 | Clay | Federico Delbonis | 6-2 7-6(4) | Nikolay Davydenko | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nikolay Davydenko | #248 | #3 | 5,335 | 2,213 | 467 | 324 | 59.0% | 0 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 16 | 21 |
| Federico Delbonis | #939 | #33 | 1,435 | 1,905 | 158 | 195 | 44.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
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 | Nikolay Davydenko | Federico Delbonis | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2009 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #195 | 1,530 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2000 | 3–1 | 75.0% | #133 | 1,544 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #160 | 1,469 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2001 | 6–15 | 28.6% | #79 | 1,568 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 3–2 | 60.0% | #166 | 1,558 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2002 | 12–24 | 33.3% | #81 | 1,601 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 6–9 | 40.0% | #133 | 1,716 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2003 | 29–30 | 49.2% | #44 | 1,595 | 0 | 2 | 2013 | 12–8 | 60.0% | #55 | 1,757 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2004 | 32–28 | 53.3% | #28 | 1,758 | 0 | 4 | 2014 | 20–27 | 42.6% | #60 | 1,660 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 2005 | 52–29 | 64.2% | #5 | 1,868 | 0 | 5 | 2015 | 15–18 | 45.5% | #52 | 1,692 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 2006 | 67–28 | 70.5% | #3 | 1,971 | 0 | 10 | 2016 | 24–22 | 52.2% | #41 | 1,754 | 0 | 2 |
| 26 | 2007 | 53–30 | 63.9% | #4 | 1,935 | 0 | 11 | 2017 | 11–10 | 52.4% | #68 | 1,811 | 0 | 2 |
| 27 | 2008 | 51–20 | 71.8% | #5 | 1,974 | 0 | 14 | 2018 | 11–18 | 37.9% | #80 | 1,723 | 0 | 2 |
| 28 | 2009 | 57–19 | 75.0% | #6 | 2,142 | 0 | 19 | 2019 | 14–20 | 41.2% | #76 | 1,686 | 0 | 2 |
| 29 | 2010 | 29–19 | 60.4% | #22 | 1,897 | 0 | 20 | 2020 | 9–12 | 42.9% | #82 | 1,705 | 0 | 2 |
| 30 | 2011 | 26–25 | 51.0% | #41 | 1,848 | 0 | 21 | 2021 | 24–24 | 50.0% | #44 | 1,719 | 0 | 2 |
| 31 | 2012 | 23–24 | 48.9% | #44 | 1,824 | 0 | 21 | 2022 | 8–21 | 27.6% | #125 | 1,672 | 0 | 2 |
| 32 | 2013 | 22–22 | 50.0% | #53 | 1,824 | 0 | 21 | 2023 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #279 | 1,599 | 0 | 2 |
| 33 | 2014 | 5–10 | 33.3% | #250 | 1,730 | 0 | 21 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |