H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 01:16 UTC
Novak Djokovic vs John Isner H2H: 8-2
Novak Djokovic holds a 8–2 lead over John Isner in their ATP head-to-head. Across 10 main-draw meetings, Novak Djokovic leads 8–2 on hard courts. Most recently, Novak Djokovic won the 2019 Shanghai Masters fourth round 7-5 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.
Serbia
Age 39
Right-Handed
188 cm / 6'2"
H2H
8
–
2
10 main draw meetings
USA
Age 41
Right-Handed
208 cm / 6'10"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 11, 2019* | Shanghai Masters | Masters 1000 | R16 | Hard | Novak Djokovic | 7-5 6-3 | John Isner | Match data |
| Nov 12, 2018 | Tour Finals | ATP Finals | RR | Hard | Novak Djokovic | 6-4 6-3 | John Isner | Match data |
| Oct 10, 2015* | Beijing | ATP 500 | QF | Hard | Novak Djokovic | 6-2 6-2 | John Isner | Match data |
| Apr 4, 2015* | Miami Masters | Masters 1000 | SF | Hard | Novak Djokovic | 7-6(3) 6-2 | John Isner | Match data |
| Mar 19, 2015* | Indian Wells Masters | Masters 1000 | R16 | Hard | Novak Djokovic | 6-4 7-6(5) | John Isner | Match data |
| Mar 15, 2014* | Indian Wells Masters | Masters 1000 | SF | Hard | Novak Djokovic | 7-5 6-7(2) 6-1 | John Isner | Match data |
| Nov 1, 2013* | Paris Masters | Masters 1000 | R16 | Hard | Novak Djokovic | 6-7(5) 6-1 6-2 | John Isner | Match data |
| Aug 17, 2013* | Cincinnati Masters | Masters 1000 | QF | Hard | John Isner | 7-6(5) 3-6 7-5 | Novak Djokovic | Match data |
| Mar 17, 2012* | Indian Wells Masters | Masters 1000 | SF | Hard | John Isner | 7-6(7) 3-6 7-6(5) | Novak Djokovic | Match data |
| Oct 9, 2010* | Beijing | ATP 500 | SF | Hard | Novak Djokovic | 7-6(1) 6-2 | John Isner | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Novak Djokovic | #7 | #1 | 16,950 | 2,593 | 1,122 | 223 | 83.4% | 24 | 40 | 7 | 14 | 15 | 100 |
| John Isner | #660 | #8 | 3,720 | 2,053 | 467 | 293 | 61.4% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 15 | 16 |
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 | Novak Djokovic | John Isner | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 2004 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #186 | 1,490 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 2005 | 9–9 | 50.0% | #78 | 1,732 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 2006 | 35–17 | 67.3% | #16 | 1,884 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 2007 | 65–19 | 77.4% | #3 | 2,067 | 0 | 7 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 21 | 2008 | 58–15 | 79.5% | #3 | 2,120 | 1 | 11 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 22 | 2009 | 78–17 | 82.1% | #3 | 2,267 | 1 | 16 | 2007 | 8–5 | 61.5% | #106 | 1,656 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2010 | 56–18 | 75.7% | #3 | 2,166 | 1 | 18 | 2008 | 11–19 | 36.7% | #144 | 1,608 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2011 | 72–6 | 92.3% | #1 | 2,357 | 4 | 28 | 2009 | 27–18 | 60.0% | #34 | 1,828 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2012 | 71–10 | 87.7% | #1 | 2,429 | 5 | 34 | 2010 | 38–20 | 65.5% | #19 | 1,882 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2013 | 67–9 | 88.2% | #2 | 2,469 | 6 | 41 | 2011 | 34–19 | 64.2% | #18 | 2,021 | 0 | 3 |
| 27 | 2014 | 65–8 | 89.0% | #1 | 2,463 | 7 | 48 | 2012 | 38–18 | 67.9% | #14 | 1,965 | 0 | 5 |
| 28 | 2015 | 82–6 | 93.2% | #1 | 2,554 | 10 | 59 | 2013 | 38–22 | 63.3% | #14 | 1,983 | 0 | 7 |
| 29 | 2016 | 64–8 | 88.9% | #2 | 2,450 | 12 | 66 | 2014 | 37–21 | 63.8% | #19 | 1,922 | 0 | 9 |
| 30 | 2017 | 31–8 | 79.5% | #12 | 2,293 | 12 | 68 | 2015 | 45–23 | 66.2% | #11 | 2,026 | 0 | 10 |
| 31 | 2018 | 53–12 | 81.5% | #1 | 2,332 | 14 | 72 | 2016 | 30–20 | 60.0% | #19 | 2,019 | 0 | 10 |
| 32 | 2019 | 55–11 | 83.3% | #2 | 2,264 | 16 | 77 | 2017 | 36–21 | 63.2% | #17 | 1,984 | 0 | 12 |
| 33 | 2020 | 35–5 | 87.5% | #1 | 2,275 | 17 | 81 | 2018 | 32–22 | 59.3% | #10 | 1,956 | 0 | 14 |
| 34 | 2021 | 46–5 | 90.2% | #1 | 2,372 | 20 | 86 | 2019 | 29–17 | 63.0% | #19 | 1,921 | 0 | 15 |
| 35 | 2022 | 42–6 | 87.5% | #5 | 2,368 | 21 | 91 | 2020 | 10–7 | 58.8% | #25 | 1,845 | 0 | 15 |
| 36 | 2023 | 54–6 | 90.0% | #1 | 2,405 | 24 | 98 | 2021 | 23–11 | 67.6% | #24 | 1,933 | 0 | 16 |
| 37 | 2024 | 29–9 | 76.3% | #7 | 2,226 | 24 | 98 | 2022 | 22–16 | 57.9% | #41 | 1,891 | 0 | 16 |
| 38 | 2025 | 39–11 | 78.0% | #4 | 2,174 | 24 | 100 | 2023 | 9–14 | 39.1% | #172 | 1,698 | 0 | 16 |
| 39 | 2026 | 15–5 | 75.0% | #7 | 2,155 | 24 | 100 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |