H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Cedric Pioline vs Kelly Evernden H2H: 1-0
Cedric Pioline holds a 1–0 lead over Kelly Evernden in their ATP head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Cedric Pioline leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Cedric Pioline won the 1992 Indianapolis second round 6-4 6-2.
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
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
NZL
Age 64
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 17, 1992 | Indianapolis | ATP 250 | R64 | Hard | Cedric Pioline | 6-4 6-2 | Kelly Evernden | Match data |
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 |
| Kelly Evernden | #1,218 | #31 | 535 | 1,853 | 121 | 129 | 48.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
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 | Kelly Evernden | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1980 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #403 | 1,505 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1989 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #202 | 1,483 | 0 | 0 | 1982 | 1–1 | 50.0% | — | 1,506 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1990 | 5–12 | 29.4% | #118 | 1,484 | 0 | 0 | 1983 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #576 | 1,495 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1991 | 21–20 | 51.2% | #51 | 1,664 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 23 | 1992 | 31–27 | 53.4% | #33 | 1,845 | 0 | 0 | 1985 | 17–11 | 60.7% | #86 | 1,670 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 1993 | 51–27 | 65.4% | #10 | 1,936 | 0 | 0 | 1986 | 2–12 | 14.3% | #289 | 1,543 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 1994 | 29–28 | 50.9% | #51 | 1,767 | 0 | 0 | 1987 | 29–18 | 61.7% | #36 | 1,793 | 0 | 2 |
| 26 | 1995 | 24–27 | 47.1% | #54 | 1,760 | 0 | 0 | 1988 | 15–23 | 39.5% | #119 | 1,607 | 0 | 2 |
| 27 | 1996 | 38–21 | 64.4% | #21 | 1,805 | 0 | 1 | 1989 | 30–18 | 62.5% | #38 | 1,707 | 0 | 3 |
| 28 | 1997 | 37–25 | 59.7% | #20 | 1,834 | 0 | 2 | 1990 | 15–23 | 39.5% | #97 | 1,615 | 0 | 3 |
| 29 | 1998 | 38–26 | 59.4% | #18 | 1,764 | 0 | 2 | 1991 | 4–13 | 23.5% | #193 | 1,512 | 0 | 3 |
| 30 | 1999 | 37–28 | 56.9% | #13 | 1,795 | 0 | 3 | 1992 | 5–5 | 50.0% | #207 | 1,560 | 0 | 3 |
| 31 | 2000 | 32–19 | 62.7% | #16 | 1,760 | 0 | 5 | 1993 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #447 | 1,580 | 0 | 3 |
| 32 | 2001 | 17–22 | 43.6% | #84 | 1,657 | 0 | 5 | 1994 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #1198 | 1,570 | 0 | 3 |
| 33 | 2002 | 10–16 | 38.5% | #119 | 1,618 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |