H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 07:16 UTC
Andrey Rublev vs Tomas Berdych H2H: 1-1
Andrey Rublev and Tomas Berdych are tied 1–1 in their ATP head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on hard courts. Most recently, Andrey Rublev won the 2017 Beijing fourth round 1-6 6-4 6-1.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
Russia
Age 28
Right-Handed
188 cm / 6'2"
H2H
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
CZE
Age 40
Right-Handed
196 cm / 6'5"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 6, 2017* | Beijing | ATP 500 | R16 | Hard | Andrey Rublev | 1-6 6-4 6-1 | Tomas Berdych | Match data |
| Mar 25, 2017* | Miami Masters | Masters 1000 | R64 | Hard | Tomas Berdych | 6-3 6-2 | Andrey Rublev | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Andrey Rublev | #16 | #5 | 6,400 | 2,186 | 372 | 212 | 63.7% | 0 | 2 | 0 | 5 | 10 | 17 |
| Tomas Berdych | #104 | #4 | 5,230 | 2,232 | 594 | 321 | 64.9% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 8 | 13 |
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 | Andrey Rublev | Tomas Berdych | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | 2014 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #437 | 1,476 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 2015 | 6–11 | 35.3% | #185 | 1,639 | 0 | 0 | 2003 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #113 | 1,525 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2016 | 2–5 | 28.6% | #156 | 1,546 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 12–13 | 48.0% | #45 | 1,657 | 0 | 1 |
| 19 | 2017 | 18–15 | 54.5% | #39 | 1,833 | 0 | 1 | 2005 | 31–26 | 54.4% | #24 | 1,866 | 0 | 2 |
| 20 | 2018 | 17–20 | 45.9% | #68 | 1,752 | 0 | 1 | 2006 | 42–24 | 63.6% | #13 | 1,933 | 0 | 2 |
| 21 | 2019 | 34–19 | 64.2% | #23 | 1,974 | 0 | 2 | 2007 | 42–21 | 66.7% | #14 | 1,913 | 0 | 3 |
| 22 | 2020 | 41–10 | 80.4% | #8 | 2,134 | 0 | 7 | 2008 | 30–18 | 62.5% | #20 | 1,919 | 0 | 4 |
| 23 | 2021 | 46–21 | 68.7% | #5 | 1,970 | 0 | 8 | 2009 | 33–24 | 57.9% | #20 | 1,885 | 0 | 5 |
| 24 | 2022 | 51–20 | 71.8% | #8 | 2,034 | 0 | 12 | 2010 | 41–24 | 63.1% | #6 | 1,919 | 0 | 5 |
| 25 | 2023 | 56–25 | 69.1% | #5 | 2,053 | 0 | 14 | 2011 | 51–23 | 68.9% | #7 | 2,080 | 0 | 6 |
| 26 | 2024 | 43–27 | 61.4% | #8 | 1,864 | 0 | 16 | 2012 | 52–20 | 72.2% | #6 | 2,157 | 0 | 8 |
| 27 | 2025 | 36–25 | 59.0% | #16 | 1,841 | 0 | 17 | 2013 | 51–24 | 68.0% | #7 | 2,084 | 0 | 8 |
| 28 | 2026 | 22–13 | 62.9% | #16 | 1,871 | 0 | 17 | 2014 | 53–22 | 70.7% | #7 | 2,082 | 0 | 10 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2015 | 57–22 | 72.2% | #6 | 2,109 | 0 | 12 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2016 | 39–19 | 67.2% | #10 | 2,080 | 0 | 13 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2017 | 35–18 | 66.0% | #19 | 2,027 | 0 | 13 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2018 | 11–12 | 47.8% | #71 | 1,909 | 0 | 13 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2019 | 13–9 | 59.1% | #104 | 1,869 | 0 | 13 |