H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 07:16 UTC
Bernard Tomic vs Aljaz Bedene H2H: 1-1
Bernard Tomic and Aljaz Bedene are tied 1–1 in their ATP head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Aljaz Bedene leads 1–0 on clay, while Bernard Tomic leads 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Aljaz Bedene won the 2019 Budapest third round 7-6(5) 6-4.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
Australia
Age 33
Right-Handed
196 cm / 6'5"
H2H
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
SLO
Age 37
Right-Handed
183 cm / 6'0"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 25, 2019* | Budapest | ATP 250 | R32 | Clay | Aljaz Bedene | 7-6(5) 6-4 | Bernard Tomic | Match data |
| Jun 11, 2016* | S Hertogenbosch | ATP 250 | R16 | Grass | Bernard Tomic | 6-4 6-3 | Aljaz Bedene | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bernard Tomic | #206 | #17 | 1,885 | 1,968 | 170 | 182 | 48.3% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 4 |
| Aljaz Bedene | #1,030 | #43 | 1,169 | 1,893 | 130 | 159 | 45.0% | 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 | Bernard Tomic | Aljaz Bedene | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | 2009 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #286 | 1,526 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 2010 | 2–6 | 25.0% | #208 | 1,591 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 2011 | 14–14 | 50.0% | #42 | 1,790 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 2012 | 22–25 | 46.8% | #52 | 1,763 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 2013 | 21–22 | 48.8% | #51 | 1,788 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 21 | 2014 | 17–16 | 51.5% | #56 | 1,828 | 0 | 2 | 2011 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #165 | 1,597 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2015 | 37–27 | 57.8% | #18 | 1,913 | 0 | 3 | 2012 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #86 | 1,627 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2016 | 28–23 | 54.9% | #26 | 1,872 | 0 | 3 | 2013 | 10–17 | 37.0% | #95 | 1,625 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2017 | 10–20 | 33.3% | #140 | 1,726 | 0 | 3 | 2014 | 5–9 | 35.7% | #145 | 1,669 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2018 | 9–7 | 56.2% | #83 | 1,744 | 0 | 4 | 2015 | 17–17 | 50.0% | #45 | 1,775 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2019 | 7–15 | 31.8% | #185 | 1,632 | 0 | 4 | 2016 | 12–19 | 38.7% | #101 | 1,740 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2020 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #226 | 1,598 | 0 | 4 | 2017 | 19–18 | 51.4% | #49 | 1,816 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2021 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #260 | 1,613 | 0 | 4 | 2018 | 17–19 | 47.2% | #67 | 1,732 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2019 | 18–18 | 50.0% | #58 | 1,838 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2020 | 10–12 | 45.5% | #58 | 1,796 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2021 | 15–15 | 50.0% | #109 | 1,773 | 0 | 0 |
| 32 | 2025 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #192 | 1,595 | 0 | 4 | 2022 | 3–10 | 23.1% | #347 | 1,658 | 0 | 0 |