H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Tomas Carbonell vs Diego Nargiso H2H: 1-1
Tomas Carbonell and Diego Nargiso are tied 1–1 in their ATP head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Diego Nargiso leads 1–0 on carpet, while Tomas Carbonell leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Tomas Carbonell won the 1995 Palermo third round 7-5 4-6 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.
ESP
Age 57
Right-Handed
178 cm / 5'10"
H2H
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
ITA
Age 56
Left-Handed
188 cm / 6'2"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 28, 1995* | Palermo | ATP 250 | R32 | Clay | Tomas Carbonell | 7-5 4-6 7-5 | Diego Nargiso | Match data |
| Feb 5, 1994* | Marseille | ATP 250 | QF | Carpet | Diego Nargiso | 6-1 7-6(7) | Tomas Carbonell | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tomas Carbonell | #860 | #40 | 900 | 1,776 | 193 | 222 | 46.5% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| Diego Nargiso | #1,400 | #67 | 531 | 1,702 | 94 | 152 | 38.2% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
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 | Tomas Carbonell | Diego Nargiso | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 1986 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #404 | 1,480 | 0 | 0 | 1987 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #191 | 1,511 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 1987 | 4–3 | 57.1% | #242 | 1,558 | 0 | 0 | 1988 | 10–12 | 45.5% | #90 | 1,621 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1988 | 7–7 | 50.0% | #209 | 1,573 | 0 | 0 | 1989 | 11–19 | 36.7% | #150 | 1,590 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1989 | 15–15 | 50.0% | #77 | 1,623 | 0 | 0 | 1990 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #147 | 1,618 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1990 | 25–23 | 52.1% | #76 | 1,708 | 0 | 0 | 1991 | 9–14 | 39.1% | #109 | 1,603 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1991 | 14–26 | 35.0% | #96 | 1,623 | 0 | 0 | 1992 | 19–22 | 46.3% | #88 | 1,596 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 1992 | 21–19 | 52.5% | #65 | 1,658 | 0 | 1 | 1993 | 8–23 | 25.8% | #120 | 1,525 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 1993 | 18–28 | 39.1% | #89 | 1,580 | 0 | 1 | 1994 | 10–18 | 35.7% | #118 | 1,530 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 1994 | 28–27 | 50.9% | #62 | 1,639 | 0 | 1 | 1995 | 5–10 | 33.3% | #183 | 1,528 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 1995 | 26–26 | 50.0% | #74 | 1,677 | 0 | 1 | 1996 | 2–8 | 20.0% | #280 | 1,507 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 1996 | 21–25 | 45.7% | #75 | 1,585 | 0 | 2 | 1997 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #152 | 1,546 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 1997 | 8–13 | 38.1% | #170 | 1,576 | 0 | 2 | 1998 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #128 | 1,563 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 1998 | 5–5 | 50.0% | #167 | 1,619 | 0 | 2 | 1999 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #220 | 1,524 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 1999 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #826 | 1,581 | 0 | 2 | 2000 | 8–4 | 66.7% | #134 | 1,612 | 0 | 0 |