H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Andrei Chesnokov vs Tarik Benhabiles H2H: 2-1
Andrei Chesnokov holds a 2–1 lead over Tarik Benhabiles in their ATP head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on clay, while Andrei Chesnokov leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Andrei Chesnokov won the 1988 Australian Open second round 6-1 7-5 7-6.
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
–
1
3 main draw meetings
FRA
Age 61
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 15, 1988* | Australian Open | Grand Slam | R64 | Hard | Andrei Chesnokov | 6-1 7-5 7-6 | Tarik Benhabiles | Match data |
| May 31, 1987* | Roland Garros | Grand Slam | R32 | Clay | Tarik Benhabiles | 5-7 6-4 7-5 6-3 | Andrei Chesnokov | Match data |
| Apr 17, 1987* | Nice | ATP 250 | R16 | Clay | Andrei Chesnokov | 6-4 1-6 6-2 | Tarik Benhabiles | 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 |
| Tarik Benhabiles | #1,262 | #22 | 387 | 1,767 | 69 | 105 | 39.7% | 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 | Andrei Chesnokov | Tarik Benhabiles | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1982 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,483 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1983 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #616 | 1,465 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1985 | 3–3 | 50.0% | #137 | 1,546 | 0 | 0 | 1984 | 10–9 | 52.6% | #71 | 1,597 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1986 | 13–9 | 59.1% | #36 | 1,733 | 0 | 0 | 1985 | 16–26 | 38.1% | #134 | 1,502 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1987 | 24–16 | 60.0% | #52 | 1,802 | 0 | 1 | 1986 | 7–7 | 50.0% | #46 | 1,609 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1988 | 44–16 | 73.3% | #14 | 1,884 | 0 | 2 | 1987 | 12–17 | 41.4% | #65 | 1,609 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 1989 | 30–16 | 65.2% | #22 | 1,863 | 0 | 4 | 1988 | 4–10 | 28.6% | #230 | 1,578 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 1990 | 43–20 | 68.3% | #12 | 1,861 | 0 | 6 | 1989 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #113 | 1,599 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 1991 | 28–21 | 57.1% | #31 | 1,781 | 0 | 7 | 1990 | 12–17 | 41.4% | #107 | 1,578 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 1992 | 28–27 | 50.9% | #30 | 1,726 | 0 | 7 | 1991 | 5–11 | 31.2% | #177 | 1,544 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 1993 | 37–28 | 56.9% | #27 | 1,749 | 0 | 7 | 1992 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #378 | 1,532 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 1994 | 37–29 | 56.1% | #32 | 1,773 | 0 | 7 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 1995 | 14–22 | 38.9% | #89 | 1,628 | 0 | 7 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 1996 | 11–20 | 35.5% | #85 | 1,585 | 0 | 7 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 1997 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #209 | 1,571 | 0 | 7 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 1998 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #494 | 1,565 | 0 | 7 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 1999 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #872 | 1,551 | 0 | 7 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |