H2H data updated: 2026-07-17 14:15 UTC
Andrei Chesnokov vs Luiz Mattar H2H: 2-2
Andrei Chesnokov and Luiz Mattar are tied 2–2 in their ATP head-to-head. Across 4 main-draw meetings, Luiz Mattar leads 2–1 on hard courts, while Andrei Chesnokov leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Luiz Mattar won the 1994 Tel Aviv third round 6-4 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.
RUS
Age 60
Right-Handed
188 cm / 6'2"
H2H
2
–
2
4 main draw meetings
BRA
Age 62
Right-Handed
183 cm / 6'0"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 13, 1994* | Tel Aviv | ATP 250 | R32 | Hard | Luiz Mattar | 6-4 6-2 | Andrei Chesnokov | Match data |
| Aug 27, 1993* | Long Island | ATP 250 | R16 | Hard | Luiz Mattar | 6-4 6-4 | Andrei Chesnokov | Match data |
| Apr 21, 1993* | Monte Carlo Masters | Masters 1000 | R64 | Clay | Andrei Chesnokov | 6-0 6-4 | Luiz Mattar | Match data |
| Aug 28, 1992* | Schenectady | ATP 250 | R16 | Hard | Andrei Chesnokov | 6-4 6-3 | Luiz Mattar | 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 |
| Luiz Mattar | #888 | #29 | 796 | 1,772 | 176 | 161 | 52.2% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 7 |
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 | Luiz Mattar | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 1986 | 13–9 | 59.1% | #36 | 1,733 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 21 | 1987 | 24–16 | 60.0% | #52 | 1,802 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 22 | 1988 | 44–16 | 73.3% | #14 | 1,884 | 0 | 2 | 1986 | 6–7 | 46.2% | #95 | 1,566 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 1989 | 30–16 | 65.2% | #22 | 1,863 | 0 | 4 | 1987 | 24–17 | 58.5% | #38 | 1,696 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 1990 | 43–20 | 68.3% | #12 | 1,861 | 0 | 6 | 1988 | 19–16 | 54.3% | #44 | 1,691 | 0 | 2 |
| 25 | 1991 | 28–21 | 57.1% | #31 | 1,781 | 0 | 7 | 1989 | 23–15 | 60.5% | #62 | 1,684 | 0 | 4 |
| 26 | 1992 | 28–27 | 50.9% | #30 | 1,726 | 0 | 7 | 1990 | 25–18 | 58.1% | #43 | 1,696 | 0 | 5 |
| 27 | 1993 | 37–28 | 56.9% | #27 | 1,749 | 0 | 7 | 1991 | 17–24 | 41.5% | #113 | 1,635 | 0 | 5 |
| 28 | 1994 | 37–29 | 56.1% | #32 | 1,773 | 0 | 7 | 1992 | 21–16 | 56.8% | #51 | 1,718 | 0 | 6 |
| 29 | 1995 | 14–22 | 38.9% | #89 | 1,628 | 0 | 7 | 1993 | 19–22 | 46.3% | #70 | 1,691 | 0 | 6 |
| 30 | 1996 | 11–20 | 35.5% | #85 | 1,585 | 0 | 7 | 1994 | 20–18 | 52.6% | #73 | 1,696 | 0 | 7 |
| 31 | 1997 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #209 | 1,571 | 0 | 7 | 1995 | 2–8 | 20.0% | #404 | 1,593 | 0 | 7 |
| 32 | 1998 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #494 | 1,565 | 0 | 7 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 1999 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #872 | 1,551 | 0 | 7 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |