Hard Court Statistics Overview
Lorenzo Manta has found hard courts difficult, recording 7–11 across 18 matches (38.9%). The numbers point to a surface that has not consistently suited the game — a key area of opportunity on the calendar.
At Grand Slam level (Australian Open & US Open): 1–2 across just 3 matches — still very early days at this level on hard.
By format on hard — best-of-five: 1–3 (25.0%); best-of-three: 6–8 (42.9%). Markedly stronger in three-set formats; the win rate drops noticeably in five-setters, which has direct implications for Grand Slam performance on hard.
Best season: 1999 — 3–3 (50.0%) from 6 matches. The best single-season display to date — a useful reference point as the hard record continues to develop.
Lorenzo Manta Hard Court Record by Year
| Year | W | L | Win% | Titles | Finals | SF | QF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000 | 4 | 6 | 40.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 1999 | 3 | 3 | 50.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 1997 | 0 | 1 | 0.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 1996 | 0 | 1 | 0.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Recent Hard Court Matches
| Date | Result | Opponent | Tournament | Round | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000-08-14 | Win | (74) Sargis Sargsian | Washington | R64 | 7-5 6-7(2) 6-4 |
| 2000-08-14 | Loss | (15) Nicolas Kiefer | Washington | R16 | 5-7 6-4 6-4 |
| 2000-08-14 | Win | (133) Fernando Gonzalez | Washington | R32 | 6-3 2-6 6-4 |
| 2000-07-24 | Loss | (75) Paul Goldstein | Los Angeles | R32 | 3-6 6-1 6-4 |
| 2000-02-28 | Loss | (54) Rainer Schuettler | Copenhagen | R32 | 6-1 6-2 |
| 2000-02-14 | Loss | (419) Brian MacPhie | Memphis | R64 | 6-3 3-6 6-3 |
| 2000-01-17 | Loss | (35) Karim Alami | Australian Open | R128 | 6-4 7-6(5) 7-5 |
| 2000-01-03 | Win | (123) Michal Tabara | Chennai | R16 | 6-4 6-3 |
| 2000-01-03 | Win | (111) Tomas Zib | Chennai | R32 | 7-5 6-2 |
| 2000-01-03 | Loss | (104) Martin Damm | Chennai | QF | 6-4 6-4 |
Lorenzo Manta
Lorenzo Manta Hard Court Stats & Match Results
Hard Court Statistics Overview
Lorenzo Manta has found hard courts difficult, recording 7–11 across 18 matches (38.9%). The numbers point to a surface that has not consistently suited the game — a key area of opportunity on the calendar.
At Grand Slam level (Australian Open & US Open): 1–2 across just 3 matches — still very early days at this level on hard.
By format on hard — best-of-five: 1–3 (25.0%); best-of-three: 6–8 (42.9%). Markedly stronger in three-set formats; the win rate drops noticeably in five-setters, which has direct implications for Grand Slam performance on hard.
Best season: 1999 — 3–3 (50.0%) from 6 matches. The best single-season display to date — a useful reference point as the hard record continues to develop.
Last 10 Hard Matches
View All Matches ↗| Date | Tournament | Surface | Round | Wrk | Winner | Lrk | Loser | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000-08-14 | Washington | Hard | R64 | 174 | 74 | 7-5 6-7(2) 6-4 | ||
| 2000-08-14 | Washington | Hard | R16 | 15 | 174 | 5-7 6-4 6-4 | ||
| 2000-08-14 | Washington | Hard | R32 | 174 | 133 | 6-3 2-6 6-4 | ||
| 2000-07-24 | Los Angeles | Hard | R32 | 75 | 172 | 3-6 6-1 6-4 | ||
| 2000-02-28 | Copenhagen | Hard | R32 | 54 | 108 | 6-1 6-2 | ||
| 2000-02-14 | Memphis | Hard | R64 | 419 | 104 | 6-3 3-6 6-3 | ||
| 2000-01-17 | Australian Open | Hard | R128 | 35 | MARKarim Alami | 107 | 6-4 7-6(5) 7-5 | |
| 2000-01-03 | Chennai | Hard | R16 | 115 | 123 | 6-4 6-3 | ||
| 2000-01-03 | Chennai | Hard | R32 | 115 | 111 | 7-5 6-2 | ||
| 2000-01-03 | Chennai | Hard | QF | 104 | 115 | 6-4 6-4 |
Matches — Hard