H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Ricardo Acuna vs Peter Lundgren H2H: 1-0
Ricardo Acuna holds a 1–0 lead over Peter Lundgren in their ATP head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Ricardo Acuna leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Ricardo Acuna won the 1986 US Open first round 6-2 2-6 6-3 7-6.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
CHI
Age 68
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
SWE
Right-Handed
185 cm / 6'1"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 28, 1986* | US Open | Grand Slam | R128 | Hard | Ricardo Acuna | 6-2 2-6 6-3 7-6 | Peter Lundgren | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ricardo Acuna | #1,264 | #47 | 19 | 1,729 | 60 | 101 | 37.3% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Peter Lundgren | #472 | #25 | 619 | 1,867 | 119 | 136 | 46.7% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
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 | Ricardo Acuna | Peter Lundgren | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1983 | 1–1 | 50.0% | — | 1,515 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1978 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #232 | 1,494 | 0 | 0 | 1985 | 8–4 | 66.7% | #31 | 1,670 | 0 | 1 |
| 21 | 1979 | 3–2 | 60.0% | #312 | 1,532 | 0 | 0 | 1986 | 15–22 | 40.5% | #98 | 1,639 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 1980 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #151 | 1,529 | 0 | 0 | 1987 | 28–17 | 62.2% | #26 | 1,837 | 0 | 3 |
| 23 | 1981 | 2–9 | 18.2% | #151 | 1,506 | 0 | 0 | 1988 | 20–21 | 48.8% | #66 | 1,735 | 0 | 3 |
| 24 | 1982 | 7–10 | 41.2% | #100 | 1,545 | 0 | 0 | 1989 | 12–14 | 46.2% | #71 | 1,701 | 0 | 3 |
| 25 | 1983 | 15–17 | 46.9% | #91 | 1,628 | 0 | 0 | 1990 | 15–18 | 45.5% | #65 | 1,711 | 0 | 3 |
| 26 | 1984 | 6–11 | 35.3% | #152 | 1,584 | 0 | 0 | 1991 | 13–25 | 34.2% | #138 | 1,608 | 0 | 3 |
| 27 | 1985 | 9–10 | 47.4% | #57 | 1,630 | 0 | 0 | 1992 | 5–8 | 38.5% | #213 | 1,576 | 0 | 3 |
| 28 | 1986 | 9–20 | 31.0% | #171 | 1,564 | 0 | 0 | 1993 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #254 | 1,566 | 0 | 3 |
| 29 | 1987 | 3–8 | 27.3% | #199 | 1,521 | 0 | 0 | 1994 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #386 | 1,531 | 0 | 3 |
| 30 | 1988 | 4–7 | 36.4% | #163 | 1,576 | 0 | 0 | 1995 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #384 | 1,532 | 0 | 3 |
| 31 | 1989 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #530 | 1,535 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |