H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Nikolay Davydenko vs Ivan Dodig H2H: 1-2
Ivan Dodig holds a 2–1 lead over Nikolay Davydenko in their ATP head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on hard courts, while Ivan Dodig leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Ivan Dodig won the 2013 US Open second round 6-1 6-4 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
1
–
2
3 main draw meetings
CRO
Age 41
Right-Handed
183 cm / 6'0"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 29, 2013* | US Open | Grand Slam | R64 | Hard | Ivan Dodig | 6-1 6-4 6-4 | Nikolay Davydenko | Match data |
| May 2, 2013* | Munich | ATP 250 | R32 | Clay | Ivan Dodig | 6-4 6-4 | Nikolay Davydenko | Match data |
| Aug 31, 2011* | US Open | Grand Slam | R128 | Hard | Nikolay Davydenko | 6-7(6) 6-3 6-0 2-6 6-2 | Ivan Dodig | 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 |
| Ivan Dodig | #423 | #29 | 1,330 | 1,964 | 114 | 129 | 46.9% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
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 | Ivan Dodig | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 19 | 2000 | 3–1 | 75.0% | #133 | 1,544 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 2001 | 6–15 | 28.6% | #79 | 1,568 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 21 | 2002 | 12–24 | 33.3% | #81 | 1,601 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 22 | 2003 | 29–30 | 49.2% | #44 | 1,595 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 23 | 2004 | 32–28 | 53.3% | #28 | 1,758 | 0 | 4 | 2008 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #422 | 1,508 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2005 | 52–29 | 64.2% | #5 | 1,868 | 0 | 5 | 2009 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #180 | 1,546 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2006 | 67–28 | 70.5% | #3 | 1,971 | 0 | 10 | 2010 | 7–7 | 50.0% | #88 | 1,723 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2007 | 53–30 | 63.9% | #4 | 1,935 | 0 | 11 | 2011 | 26–23 | 53.1% | #36 | 1,774 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2008 | 51–20 | 71.8% | #5 | 1,974 | 0 | 14 | 2012 | 15–21 | 41.7% | #72 | 1,784 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2009 | 57–19 | 75.0% | #6 | 2,142 | 0 | 19 | 2013 | 31–23 | 57.4% | #33 | 1,916 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 2010 | 29–19 | 60.4% | #22 | 1,897 | 0 | 20 | 2014 | 15–23 | 39.5% | #95 | 1,757 | 0 | 1 |
| 30 | 2011 | 26–25 | 51.0% | #41 | 1,848 | 0 | 21 | 2015 | 8–11 | 42.1% | #87 | 1,666 | 0 | 1 |
| 31 | 2012 | 23–24 | 48.9% | #44 | 1,824 | 0 | 21 | 2016 | 7–16 | 30.4% | #147 | 1,571 | 0 | 1 |
| 32 | 2013 | 22–22 | 50.0% | #53 | 1,824 | 0 | 21 | 2017 | 3–2 | 60.0% | #336 | 1,602 | 0 | 1 |
| 33 | 2014 | 5–10 | 33.3% | #250 | 1,730 | 0 | 21 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |