H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 14:16 UTC
Amos Mansdorf vs Tomas Smid H2H: 2-1
Amos Mansdorf holds a 2–1 lead over Tomas Smid in their ATP head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on carpet, while Amos Mansdorf leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Tomas Smid won the 1987 Milan third round 6-3 1-6 6-2.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
ISR
Age 60
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H
2
–
1
3 main draw meetings
CZE
Age 70
Right-Handed
190 cm / 6'3"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 2, 1987* | Milan | ATP 250 | R32 | Carpet | Tomas Smid | 6-3 1-6 6-2 | Amos Mansdorf | Match data |
| Aug 28, 1986* | US Open | Grand Slam | R128 | Hard | Amos Mansdorf | 6-4 7-6 6-3 | Tomas Smid | Match data |
| Mar 13, 1986* | Milan | ATP 250 | R32 | Carpet | Amos Mansdorf | 6-2 6-3 | Tomas Smid | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Amos Mansdorf | #514 | #18 | 1,184 | 1,897 | 288 | 214 | 57.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 6 |
| Tomas Smid | #975 | #11 | 28 | 1,998 | 497 | 318 | 61.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 10 |
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 | Amos Mansdorf | Tomas Smid | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 15 | 1981 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,489 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 1983 | 1–1 | 50.0% | — | 1,499 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 1984 | 3–2 | 60.0% | #270 | 1,531 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 1985 | 15–13 | 53.6% | #84 | 1,672 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 1986 | 19–17 | 52.8% | #37 | 1,799 | 0 | 1 | 1976 | 5–7 | 41.7% | #154 | 1,542 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1987 | 35–21 | 62.5% | #27 | 1,806 | 0 | 2 | 1977 | 16–18 | 47.1% | #67 | 1,637 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1988 | 31–16 | 66.0% | #26 | 1,853 | 0 | 4 | 1978 | 36–25 | 59.0% | #36 | 1,799 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 1989 | 29–19 | 60.4% | #39 | 1,740 | 0 | 4 | 1979 | 50–25 | 66.7% | #27 | 1,870 | 0 | 2 |
| 24 | 1990 | 39–23 | 62.9% | #33 | 1,827 | 0 | 5 | 1980 | 45–21 | 68.2% | #23 | 1,950 | 0 | 4 |
| 25 | 1991 | 21–25 | 45.7% | #62 | 1,738 | 0 | 5 | 1981 | 54–28 | 65.9% | #28 | 1,864 | 0 | 5 |
| 26 | 1992 | 35–27 | 56.5% | #25 | 1,771 | 0 | 5 | 1982 | 62–28 | 68.9% | #24 | 1,901 | 0 | 7 |
| 27 | 1993 | 40–24 | 62.5% | #25 | 1,787 | 0 | 6 | 1983 | 59–30 | 66.3% | #17 | 1,902 | 0 | 9 |
| 28 | 1994 | 20–25 | 44.4% | #69 | 1,692 | 0 | 6 | 1984 | 46–27 | 63.0% | #16 | 1,840 | 0 | 9 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1985 | 47–27 | 63.5% | #19 | 1,804 | 0 | 10 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1986 | 28–24 | 53.8% | #54 | 1,721 | 0 | 10 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1987 | 30–26 | 53.6% | #31 | 1,729 | 0 | 10 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1988 | 17–23 | 42.5% | #115 | 1,656 | 0 | 10 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1989 | 2–9 | 18.2% | #453 | 1,537 | 0 | 10 |