H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Byron Black vs Daniel Vacek H2H: 3-0
Byron Black holds a 3–0 lead over Daniel Vacek in their ATP head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Byron Black leads 3–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Byron Black won the 1998 Tokyo semifinal 6-3 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.
ZIM
Age 56
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H
3
–
0
3 main draw meetings
CZE
Age 55
Right-Handed
190 cm / 6'3"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 18, 1998* | Tokyo | ATP 250 | SF | Hard | Byron Black | 6-3 7-5 | Daniel Vacek | Match data |
| Jan 6, 1996* | Adelaide | ATP 250 | QF | Hard | Byron Black | 7-6(7) 6-7(5) 6-4 | Daniel Vacek | Match data |
| Aug 20, 1993* | New Haven | ATP 250 | R16 | Hard | Byron Black | 6-3 6-3 | Daniel Vacek | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Byron Black | #876 | #22 | 1,283 | 1,870 | 239 | 229 | 51.1% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| Daniel Vacek | #1,133 | #26 | 1,151 | 1,818 | 170 | 219 | 43.7% | 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 | Byron Black | Daniel Vacek | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 20 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1991 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #470 | 1,490 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1991 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #123 | 1,521 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 22 | 1992 | 10–18 | 35.7% | #142 | 1,544 | 0 | 0 | 1993 | 13–22 | 37.1% | #114 | 1,560 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 1993 | 19–20 | 48.7% | #84 | 1,662 | 0 | 0 | 1994 | 25–27 | 48.1% | #45 | 1,711 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 1994 | 22–26 | 45.8% | #66 | 1,732 | 0 | 0 | 1995 | 30–31 | 49.2% | #27 | 1,794 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 1995 | 28–24 | 53.8% | #40 | 1,832 | 0 | 0 | 1996 | 22–28 | 44.0% | #71 | 1,694 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 1996 | 34–26 | 56.7% | #44 | 1,747 | 0 | 1 | 1997 | 19–26 | 42.2% | #53 | 1,669 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 1997 | 27–24 | 52.9% | #76 | 1,724 | 0 | 1 | 1998 | 25–29 | 46.3% | #50 | 1,672 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 1998 | 37–25 | 59.7% | #28 | 1,738 | 0 | 1 | 1999 | 29–31 | 48.3% | #43 | 1,744 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 1999 | 24–23 | 51.1% | #65 | 1,690 | 0 | 2 | 2000 | 4–13 | 23.5% | #238 | 1,630 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2000 | 27–24 | 52.9% | #35 | 1,697 | 0 | 2 | 2001 | 2–7 | 22.2% | #393 | 1,595 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | 2001 | 8–13 | 38.1% | #196 | 1,647 | 0 | 2 | 2002 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #749 | 1,578 | 0 | 0 |
| 32 | 2002 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #317 | 1,634 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |