H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 07:16 UTC
Botic van de Zandschulp vs Thomas Fabbiano H2H: 1-0
Botic van de Zandschulp holds a 1–0 lead over Thomas Fabbiano in their ATP head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Botic van de Zandschulp leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Botic van de Zandschulp won the 2022 Doha third round 6-2 7-6(5).
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
Netherlands
Age 30
Right-Handed
191 cm / 6'3"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
ITA
Age 37
Right-Handed
173 cm / 5'8"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 16, 2022* | Doha | ATP 250 | R32 | Hard | Botic van de Zandschulp | 6-2 7-6(5) | Thomas Fabbiano | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Botic van de Zandschulp | #55 | #22 | 1,573 | 1,932 | 114 | 118 | 49.1% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Thomas Fabbiano | #1,768 | #70 | 715 | 1,748 | 27 | 62 | 30.3% | 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 | Botic van de Zandschulp | Thomas Fabbiano | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2008 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #371 | 1,533 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2010 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #313 | 1,552 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2013 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #180 | 1,542 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2021 | 15–10 | 60.0% | #57 | 1,856 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 26 | 2022 | 34–28 | 54.8% | #35 | 1,835 | 0 | 0 | 2015 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #157 | 1,600 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2023 | 20–24 | 45.5% | #50 | 1,793 | 0 | 0 | 2016 | 5–9 | 35.7% | #124 | 1,620 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2024 | 14–22 | 38.9% | #80 | 1,779 | 0 | 0 | 2017 | 4–12 | 25.0% | #73 | 1,595 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2025 | 16–20 | 44.4% | #77 | 1,714 | 0 | 0 | 2018 | 8–12 | 40.0% | #101 | 1,670 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2026 | 15–14 | 51.7% | #55 | 1,713 | 0 | 0 | 2019 | 10–18 | 35.7% | #114 | 1,638 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2020 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #172 | 1,593 | 0 | 0 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2021 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #204 | 1,516 | 0 | 0 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2022 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #317 | 1,525 | 0 | 0 |