H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 19:16 UTC
Cedric Pioline vs Albert Portas H2H: 2-0
Cedric Pioline holds a 2–0 lead over Albert Portas in their ATP head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Cedric Pioline leads 1–0 on clay and 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Cedric Pioline won the 2000 Roland Garros third round 6-4 6-3 6-3.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
FRA
Age 57
Right-Handed
188 cm / 6'2"
H2H
2
–
0
2 main draw meetings
ESP
Age 52
Right-Handed
188 cm / 6'2"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 4, 2000* | Roland Garros | Grand Slam | R32 | Clay | Cedric Pioline | 6-4 6-3 6-3 | Albert Portas | Match data |
| Aug 21, 1997* | Long Island | ATP 250 | R32 | Hard | Cedric Pioline | 6-2 6-4 | Albert Portas | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cedric Pioline | #750 | #5 | 2,335 | 1,983 | 370 | 301 | 55.1% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 5 |
| Albert Portas | #1,082 | #19 | 1,350 | 1,826 | 142 | 198 | 41.8% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
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 | Cedric Pioline | Albert Portas | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1993 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #392 | 1,489 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1989 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #202 | 1,483 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 21 | 1990 | 5–12 | 29.4% | #118 | 1,484 | 0 | 0 | 1995 | 4–3 | 57.1% | #119 | 1,548 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1991 | 21–20 | 51.2% | #51 | 1,664 | 0 | 0 | 1996 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #182 | 1,505 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 1992 | 31–27 | 53.4% | #33 | 1,845 | 0 | 0 | 1997 | 22–17 | 56.4% | #35 | 1,623 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 1993 | 51–27 | 65.4% | #10 | 1,936 | 0 | 0 | 1998 | 13–24 | 35.1% | #84 | 1,594 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 1994 | 29–28 | 50.9% | #51 | 1,767 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 14–18 | 43.8% | #90 | 1,599 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 1995 | 24–27 | 47.1% | #54 | 1,760 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 22–23 | 48.9% | #51 | 1,634 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 1996 | 38–21 | 64.4% | #21 | 1,805 | 0 | 1 | 2001 | 32–28 | 53.3% | #20 | 1,684 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 1997 | 37–25 | 59.7% | #20 | 1,834 | 0 | 2 | 2002 | 9–23 | 28.1% | #88 | 1,525 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 1998 | 38–26 | 59.4% | #18 | 1,764 | 0 | 2 | 2003 | 10–20 | 33.3% | #85 | 1,523 | 0 | 1 |
| 30 | 1999 | 37–28 | 56.9% | #13 | 1,795 | 0 | 3 | 2004 | 4–16 | 20.0% | #175 | 1,443 | 0 | 1 |
| 31 | 2000 | 32–19 | 62.7% | #16 | 1,760 | 0 | 5 | 2005 | 2–6 | 25.0% | #119 | 1,437 | 0 | 1 |
| 32 | 2001 | 17–22 | 43.6% | #84 | 1,657 | 0 | 5 | 2006 | 8–12 | 40.0% | #140 | 1,521 | 0 | 1 |
| 33 | 2002 | 10–16 | 38.5% | #119 | 1,618 | 0 | 5 | 2007 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #338 | 1,548 | 0 | 1 |