H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 14:16 UTC
Novak Djokovic vs Tim Henman H2H: 1-0
Novak Djokovic holds a 1–0 lead over Tim Henman in their ATP head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Novak Djokovic leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Novak Djokovic won the 2006 Rotterdam fourth round 5-7 6-3 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.
Serbia
Age 39
Right-Handed
188 cm / 6'2"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
GBR
Age 51
Right-Handed
185 cm / 6'1"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 24, 2006* | Rotterdam | ATP 250 | R16 | Hard | Novak Djokovic | 5-7 6-3 6-4 | Tim Henman | 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 |
| Tim Henman | #615 | #4 | 2,826 | 2,027 | 468 | 260 | 64.3% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 11 |
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 | Tim Henman | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1994 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #167 | 1,513 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2007 | 65–19 | 77.4% | #3 | 2,067 | 0 | 7 | 1995 | 7–7 | 50.0% | #95 | 1,584 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2008 | 58–15 | 79.5% | #3 | 2,120 | 1 | 11 | 1996 | 37–24 | 60.7% | #29 | 1,821 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2009 | 78–17 | 82.1% | #3 | 2,267 | 1 | 16 | 1997 | 47–23 | 67.1% | #17 | 1,895 | 0 | 2 |
| 23 | 2010 | 56–18 | 75.7% | #3 | 2,166 | 1 | 18 | 1998 | 55–29 | 65.5% | #7 | 1,960 | 0 | 4 |
| 24 | 2011 | 72–6 | 92.3% | #1 | 2,357 | 4 | 28 | 1999 | 41–25 | 62.1% | #12 | 1,785 | 0 | 4 |
| 25 | 2012 | 71–10 | 87.7% | #1 | 2,429 | 5 | 34 | 2000 | 55–23 | 70.5% | #10 | 1,953 | 0 | 6 |
| 26 | 2013 | 67–9 | 88.2% | #2 | 2,469 | 6 | 41 | 2001 | 49–20 | 71.0% | #9 | 1,924 | 0 | 8 |
| 27 | 2014 | 65–8 | 89.0% | #1 | 2,463 | 7 | 48 | 2002 | 45–18 | 71.4% | #8 | 1,867 | 0 | 9 |
| 28 | 2015 | 82–6 | 93.2% | #1 | 2,554 | 10 | 59 | 2003 | 30–16 | 65.2% | #15 | 1,970 | 0 | 11 |
| 29 | 2016 | 64–8 | 88.9% | #2 | 2,450 | 12 | 66 | 2004 | 41–20 | 67.2% | #6 | 1,926 | 0 | 11 |
| 30 | 2017 | 31–8 | 79.5% | #12 | 2,293 | 12 | 68 | 2005 | 23–18 | 56.1% | #36 | 1,746 | 0 | 11 |
| 31 | 2018 | 53–12 | 81.5% | #1 | 2,332 | 14 | 72 | 2006 | 31–20 | 60.8% | #39 | 1,868 | 0 | 11 |
| 32 | 2019 | 55–11 | 83.3% | #2 | 2,264 | 16 | 77 | 2007 | 4–12 | 25.0% | #292 | 1,684 | 0 | 11 |
| 33 | 2020 | 35–5 | 87.5% | #1 | 2,275 | 17 | 81 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 34 | 2021 | 46–5 | 90.2% | #1 | 2,372 | 20 | 86 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 35 | 2022 | 42–6 | 87.5% | #5 | 2,368 | 21 | 91 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 36 | 2023 | 54–6 | 90.0% | #1 | 2,405 | 24 | 98 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 37 | 2024 | 29–9 | 76.3% | #7 | 2,226 | 24 | 98 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 38 | 2025 | 39–11 | 78.0% | #4 | 2,174 | 24 | 100 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 39 | 2026 | 15–5 | 75.0% | #7 | 2,155 | 24 | 100 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |