H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Ricardo Cano vs Zeljko Franulovic H2H: 4-1
Ricardo Cano holds a 4–1 lead over Zeljko Franulovic in their ATP head-to-head. Across 5 main-draw meetings, Ricardo Cano leads 4–1 on clay. Most recently, Ricardo Cano won the 1983 Kitzbuhel second round 6-4 7-5.
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
4
–
1
5 main draw meetings
CRO
Age 79
Right-Handed
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 20, 1983* | Kitzbuhel | ATP 250 | R64 | Clay | Ricardo Cano | 6-4 7-5 | Zeljko Franulovic | Match data |
| Sep 25, 1981* | Geneva | ATP 250 | R16 | Clay | Ricardo Cano | 6-2 6-2 | Zeljko Franulovic | Match data |
| Aug 9, 1976 | Indianapolis | ATP 250 | R64 | Clay | Ricardo Cano | 6-2 6-3 | Zeljko Franulovic | Match data |
| May 27, 1976* | Rome | Masters 1000 | R32 | Clay | Zeljko Franulovic | 6-4 6-1 | Ricardo Cano | Match data |
| May 7, 1976* | Munich | ATP 250 | R32 | Clay | Ricardo Cano | 4-6 6-1 6-2 | Zeljko Franulovic | 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 |
| Zeljko Franulovic | #616 | #30 | 0 | 2,014 | 407 | 307 | 57.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 13 | 13 |
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 | Zeljko Franulovic | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 21–21 | 50.0% | — | 1,596 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1973 | 1–1 | 50.0% | — | 1,488 | 0 | 0 | 1969 | 47–20 | 70.1% | — | 1,864 | 0 | 3 |
| 23 | 1974 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #274 | 1,502 | 0 | 0 | 1970 | 64–29 | 68.8% | — | 1,934 | 0 | 7 |
| 24 | 1975 | 18–13 | 58.1% | #42 | 1,737 | 0 | 0 | 1971 | 59–28 | 67.8% | — | 1,921 | 0 | 11 |
| 25 | 1976 | 43–26 | 62.3% | #51 | 1,733 | 0 | 0 | 1972 | 4–7 | 36.4% | — | 1,756 | 0 | 11 |
| 26 | 1977 | 18–24 | 42.9% | #121 | 1,673 | 0 | 0 | 1973 | 17–22 | 43.6% | #70 | 1,706 | 0 | 11 |
| 27 | 1978 | 10–13 | 43.5% | #81 | 1,629 | 0 | 0 | 1974 | 15–19 | 44.1% | #77 | 1,657 | 0 | 11 |
| 28 | 1979 | 5–12 | 29.4% | #169 | 1,584 | 0 | 0 | 1975 | 23–26 | 46.9% | #68 | 1,747 | 0 | 11 |
| 29 | 1980 | 3–8 | 27.3% | #73 | 1,555 | 0 | 0 | 1976 | 39–24 | 61.9% | #44 | 1,916 | 0 | 12 |
| 30 | 1981 | 33–24 | 57.9% | #62 | 1,718 | 0 | 0 | 1977 | 33–22 | 60.0% | #42 | 1,762 | 0 | 13 |
| 31 | 1982 | 3–11 | 21.4% | #91 | 1,608 | 0 | 0 | 1978 | 34–27 | 55.7% | #38 | 1,800 | 0 | 13 |
| 32 | 1983 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #219 | 1,579 | 0 | 0 | 1979 | 21–24 | 46.7% | #97 | 1,768 | 0 | 13 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1980 | 20–20 | 50.0% | #86 | 1,678 | 0 | 13 |
| 34 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1981 | 7–9 | 43.8% | #100 | 1,648 | 0 | 13 |
| 35 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1982 | 3–6 | 33.3% | #93 | 1,616 | 0 | 13 |
| 36 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1983 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #140 | 1,567 | 0 | 13 |