H2H data updated: 2026-07-20 02:15 UTC
Bernard Tomic vs Lleyton Hewitt H2H: 1-0
Bernard Tomic holds a 1–0 lead over Lleyton Hewitt in their ATP head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Bernard Tomic leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Bernard Tomic won the 2015 US Open second round 6-3 6-2 3-6 5-7 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.
Australia
Age 33
Right-Handed
196 cm / 6'5"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
AUS
Age 45
Right-Handed
178 cm / 5'10"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 3, 2015* | US Open | Grand Slam | R64 | Hard | Bernard Tomic | 6-3 6-2 3-6 5-7 7-5 | Lleyton Hewitt | 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 |
| Lleyton Hewitt | #636 | #1 | 5,205 | 2,159 | 564 | 241 | 70.1% | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 23 | 30 |
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 | Lleyton Hewitt | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1997 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #550 | 1,492 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 2010 | 2–6 | 25.0% | #208 | 1,591 | 0 | 0 | 1998 | 10–9 | 52.6% | #100 | 1,614 | 0 | 1 |
| 18 | 2011 | 14–14 | 50.0% | #42 | 1,790 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 40–18 | 69.0% | #25 | 1,853 | 0 | 2 |
| 19 | 2012 | 22–25 | 46.8% | #52 | 1,763 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 53–15 | 77.9% | #7 | 1,993 | 0 | 6 |
| 20 | 2013 | 21–22 | 48.8% | #51 | 1,788 | 0 | 1 | 2001 | 71–15 | 82.6% | #1 | 2,116 | 1 | 12 |
| 21 | 2014 | 17–16 | 51.5% | #56 | 1,828 | 0 | 2 | 2002 | 61–16 | 79.2% | #1 | 2,062 | 2 | 17 |
| 22 | 2015 | 37–27 | 57.8% | #18 | 1,913 | 0 | 3 | 2003 | 29–10 | 74.4% | #17 | 1,939 | 2 | 19 |
| 23 | 2016 | 28–23 | 54.9% | #26 | 1,872 | 0 | 3 | 2004 | 64–16 | 80.0% | #3 | 2,076 | 2 | 23 |
| 24 | 2017 | 10–20 | 33.3% | #140 | 1,726 | 0 | 3 | 2005 | 36–9 | 80.0% | #4 | 2,092 | 2 | 24 |
| 25 | 2018 | 9–7 | 56.2% | #83 | 1,744 | 0 | 4 | 2006 | 32–14 | 69.6% | #20 | 1,964 | 2 | 25 |
| 26 | 2019 | 7–15 | 31.8% | #185 | 1,632 | 0 | 4 | 2007 | 34–15 | 69.4% | #21 | 1,925 | 2 | 26 |
| 27 | 2020 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #226 | 1,598 | 0 | 4 | 2008 | 17–10 | 63.0% | #67 | 1,936 | 2 | 26 |
| 28 | 2021 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #260 | 1,613 | 0 | 4 | 2009 | 33–19 | 63.5% | #22 | 1,956 | 2 | 27 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2010 | 18–11 | 62.1% | #54 | 1,907 | 2 | 28 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2011 | 8–9 | 47.1% | #186 | 1,817 | 2 | 28 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2012 | 13–11 | 54.2% | #83 | 1,867 | 2 | 28 |
| 32 | 2025 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #192 | 1,595 | 0 | 4 | 2013 | 22–18 | 55.0% | #60 | 1,884 | 2 | 28 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2014 | 19–15 | 55.9% | #50 | 1,841 | 2 | 30 |
| 34 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2015 | 3–9 | 25.0% | #307 | 1,715 | 2 | 30 |
| 35 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2016 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #633 | 1,727 | 2 | 30 |