H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 17:48 UTC
Ricardo Cano vs Cliff Richey H2H: 0-1
Cliff Richey holds a 1–0 lead over Ricardo Cano in their ATP head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Cliff Richey leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Cliff Richey won the 1971 Buenos Aires third round 6-0 6-2 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.
ARG
Age 75
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
USA
Age 79
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 4, 1971* | Buenos Aires | ATP 250 | R32 | Clay | Cliff Richey | 6-0 6-2 6-4 | Ricardo Cano | 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 Cano | #768 | #41 | 0 | 1,792 | 142 | 147 | 49.1% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Cliff Richey | #662 | #16 | 0 | 2,112 | 488 | 224 | 68.5% | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 21 | 23 |
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 Cano | Cliff Richey | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 19 | 1970 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,493 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 1971 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,489 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 21 | 1972 | 2–5 | 28.6% | — | 1,476 | 0 | 0 | 1968 | 46–15 | 75.4% | — | 1,750 | 0 | 3 |
| 22 | 1973 | 1–1 | 50.0% | — | 1,488 | 0 | 0 | 1969 | 64–18 | 78.0% | — | 1,946 | 0 | 9 |
| 23 | 1974 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #274 | 1,502 | 0 | 0 | 1970 | 88–24 | 78.6% | — | 2,047 | 0 | 14 |
| 24 | 1975 | 18–13 | 58.1% | #42 | 1,737 | 0 | 0 | 1971 | 67–23 | 74.4% | — | 1,906 | 0 | 17 |
| 25 | 1976 | 43–26 | 62.3% | #51 | 1,733 | 0 | 0 | 1972 | 54–24 | 69.2% | — | 1,956 | 0 | 20 |
| 26 | 1977 | 18–24 | 42.9% | #121 | 1,673 | 0 | 0 | 1973 | 47–26 | 64.4% | #19 | 1,848 | 0 | 20 |
| 27 | 1978 | 10–13 | 43.5% | #81 | 1,629 | 0 | 0 | 1974 | 25–16 | 61.0% | #23 | 1,891 | 0 | 21 |
| 28 | 1979 | 5–12 | 29.4% | #169 | 1,584 | 0 | 0 | 1975 | 37–24 | 60.7% | #32 | 1,855 | 0 | 21 |
| 29 | 1980 | 3–8 | 27.3% | #73 | 1,555 | 0 | 0 | 1976 | 33–24 | 57.9% | #28 | 1,848 | 0 | 22 |
| 30 | 1981 | 33–24 | 57.9% | #62 | 1,718 | 0 | 0 | 1977 | 14–17 | 45.2% | #97 | 1,714 | 0 | 22 |
| 31 | 1982 | 3–11 | 21.4% | #91 | 1,608 | 0 | 0 | 1978 | 13–12 | 52.0% | #57 | 1,705 | 0 | 23 |
| 32 | 1983 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #219 | 1,579 | 0 | 0 | 1979 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #662 | 1,693 | 0 | 23 |