H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 17:48 UTC
Andrei Chesnokov vs Andres Gomez H2H: 1-1
Andrei Chesnokov and Andres Gomez are tied 1–1 in their ATP head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Andres Gomez leads 1–0 on clay, while Andrei Chesnokov leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Andres Gomez won the 1990 Barcelona semifinal 6-3 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.
RUS
Age 60
Right-Handed
188 cm / 6'2"
H2H
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
ECU
Age 66
Left-Handed
193 cm / 6'4"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 14, 1990* | Barcelona | ATP 250 | SF | Clay | Andres Gomez | 6-3 7-5 | Andrei Chesnokov | Match data |
| Mar 11, 1988* | Orlando | ATP 250 | R16 | Hard | Andrei Chesnokov | 3-6 6-1 6-3 | Andres Gomez | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Andrei Chesnokov | #709 | #9 | 1,399 | 1,972 | 316 | 235 | 57.4% | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 7 |
| Andres Gomez | #1,171 | #4 | 2,005 | 2,092 | 502 | 261 | 65.8% | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 18 | 21 |
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 | Andrei Chesnokov | Andres Gomez | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 19 | 1985 | 3–3 | 50.0% | #137 | 1,546 | 0 | 0 | 1979 | 11–8 | 57.9% | #61 | 1,638 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1986 | 13–9 | 59.1% | #36 | 1,733 | 0 | 0 | 1980 | 36–23 | 61.0% | #42 | 1,800 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1987 | 24–16 | 60.0% | #52 | 1,802 | 0 | 1 | 1981 | 36–21 | 63.2% | #37 | 1,899 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 1988 | 44–16 | 73.3% | #14 | 1,884 | 0 | 2 | 1982 | 51–25 | 67.1% | #15 | 1,885 | 0 | 3 |
| 23 | 1989 | 30–16 | 65.2% | #22 | 1,863 | 0 | 4 | 1983 | 43–20 | 68.3% | #14 | 1,959 | 0 | 4 |
| 24 | 1990 | 43–20 | 68.3% | #12 | 1,861 | 0 | 6 | 1984 | 60–13 | 82.2% | #5 | 2,072 | 0 | 9 |
| 25 | 1991 | 28–21 | 57.1% | #31 | 1,781 | 0 | 7 | 1985 | 26–14 | 65.0% | #15 | 1,970 | 0 | 10 |
| 26 | 1992 | 28–27 | 50.9% | #30 | 1,726 | 0 | 7 | 1986 | 57–20 | 74.0% | #10 | 1,898 | 0 | 14 |
| 27 | 1993 | 37–28 | 56.9% | #27 | 1,749 | 0 | 7 | 1987 | 46–18 | 71.9% | #11 | 1,913 | 0 | 15 |
| 28 | 1994 | 37–29 | 56.1% | #32 | 1,773 | 0 | 7 | 1988 | 34–18 | 65.4% | #24 | 1,808 | 0 | 15 |
| 29 | 1995 | 14–22 | 38.9% | #89 | 1,628 | 0 | 7 | 1989 | 32–17 | 65.3% | #17 | 1,868 | 0 | 17 |
| 30 | 1996 | 11–20 | 35.5% | #85 | 1,585 | 0 | 7 | 1990 | 38–27 | 58.5% | #6 | 1,726 | 1 | 20 |
| 31 | 1997 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #209 | 1,571 | 0 | 7 | 1991 | 20–19 | 51.3% | #70 | 1,722 | 1 | 21 |
| 32 | 1998 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #494 | 1,565 | 0 | 7 | 1992 | 10–12 | 45.5% | #179 | 1,676 | 1 | 21 |
| 33 | 1999 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #872 | 1,551 | 0 | 7 | 1993 | 2–6 | 25.0% | #402 | 1,606 | 1 | 21 |