H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Cedric Pioline vs Andrei Cherkasov H2H: 2-2
Cedric Pioline and Andrei Cherkasov are tied 2–2 in their ATP head-to-head. Across 4 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on hard courts, while Cedric Pioline leads 1–0 on carpet. Most recently, Cedric Pioline won the 1992 Moscow quarterfinal 6-4 7-6(4).
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
FRA
Age 57
Right-Handed
188 cm / 6'2"
H2H
2
–
2
4 main draw meetings
RUS
Age 56
Right-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 14, 1992* | Moscow | ATP 250 | QF | Carpet | Cedric Pioline | 6-4 7-6(4) | Andrei Cherkasov | Match data |
| Oct 8, 1992* | Toulouse | ATP 250 | R32 | Hard | Cedric Pioline | 4-6 6-4 6-1 | Andrei Cherkasov | Match data |
| Jun 3, 1992* | Roland Garros | Grand Slam | R16 | Clay | Andrei Cherkasov | 6-3 6-3 7-6(1) | Cedric Pioline | Match data |
| Mar 18, 1992* | Miami Masters | Masters 1000 | R16 | Hard | Andrei Cherkasov | 7-6(1) 6-2 | Cedric Pioline | 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 |
| Andrei Cherkasov | #1,174 | #13 | 1,320 | 1,897 | 170 | 198 | 46.2% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
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 | Andrei Cherkasov | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1988 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #236 | 1,497 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1989 | 13–16 | 44.8% | #82 | 1,572 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1990 | 35–26 | 57.4% | #21 | 1,877 | 0 | 1 |
| 20 | 1989 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #202 | 1,483 | 0 | 0 | 1991 | 37–29 | 56.1% | #21 | 1,815 | 0 | 2 |
| 21 | 1990 | 5–12 | 29.4% | #118 | 1,484 | 0 | 0 | 1992 | 29–29 | 50.0% | #32 | 1,711 | 0 | 2 |
| 22 | 1991 | 21–20 | 51.2% | #51 | 1,664 | 0 | 0 | 1993 | 34–31 | 52.3% | #37 | 1,753 | 0 | 2 |
| 23 | 1992 | 31–27 | 53.4% | #33 | 1,845 | 0 | 0 | 1994 | 8–27 | 22.9% | #172 | 1,554 | 0 | 2 |
| 24 | 1993 | 51–27 | 65.4% | #10 | 1,936 | 0 | 0 | 1995 | 2–5 | 28.6% | #184 | 1,535 | 0 | 2 |
| 25 | 1994 | 29–28 | 50.9% | #51 | 1,767 | 0 | 0 | 1996 | 3–12 | 20.0% | #133 | 1,463 | 0 | 2 |
| 26 | 1995 | 24–27 | 47.1% | #54 | 1,760 | 0 | 0 | 1997 | 5–10 | 33.3% | #164 | 1,485 | 0 | 2 |
| 27 | 1996 | 38–21 | 64.4% | #21 | 1,805 | 0 | 1 | 1998 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #164 | 1,462 | 0 | 2 |
| 28 | 1997 | 37–25 | 59.7% | #20 | 1,834 | 0 | 2 | 1999 | 3–6 | 33.3% | #217 | 1,483 | 0 | 2 |
| 29 | 1998 | 38–26 | 59.4% | #18 | 1,764 | 0 | 2 | 2000 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #198 | 1,452 | 0 | 2 |
| 30 | 1999 | 37–28 | 56.9% | #13 | 1,795 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 2000 | 32–19 | 62.7% | #16 | 1,760 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 2001 | 17–22 | 43.6% | #84 | 1,657 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 2002 | 10–16 | 38.5% | #119 | 1,618 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |