H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Cedric Pioline vs Vincent Spadea H2H: 1-3
Vincent Spadea holds a 3–1 lead over Cedric Pioline in their ATP head-to-head. Across 4 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on hard courts, while Vincent Spadea leads 1–0 on carpet. Most recently, Vincent Spadea won the 2002 Roland Garros first round 4-6 6-4 6-4 3-6 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
1
–
3
4 main draw meetings
USA
Right-Handed
183 cm / 6'0"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 29, 2002* | Roland Garros | Grand Slam | R128 | Clay | Vincent Spadea | 4-6 6-4 6-4 3-6 6-4 | Cedric Pioline | Match data |
| Nov 4, 1998* | Paris Masters | Masters 1000 | R64 | Carpet | Vincent Spadea | 6-4 6-4 | Cedric Pioline | Match data |
| Aug 9, 1995* | Cincinnati Masters | Masters 1000 | R64 | Hard | Vincent Spadea | 6-2 3-6 6-4 | Cedric Pioline | Match data |
| Mar 9, 1994* | Miami Masters | Masters 1000 | R64 | Hard | Cedric Pioline | 6-3 6-3 | Vincent Spadea | 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 |
| Vincent Spadea | #1,474 | #18 | 1,629 | 1,876 | 310 | 348 | 47.1% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 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.
| Cedric Pioline | Vincent Spadea | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles |
| 1989 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #202 | 1,483 | 0 | 0 | 1993 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #303 | 1,483 | 0 | 0 |
| 1990 | 5–12 | 29.4% | #118 | 1,484 | 0 | 0 | 1994 | 11–13 | 45.8% | #75 | 1,561 | 0 | 0 |
| 1991 | 21–20 | 51.2% | #51 | 1,664 | 0 | 0 | 1995 | 21–28 | 42.9% | #81 | 1,639 | 0 | 0 |
| 1992 | 31–27 | 53.4% | #33 | 1,845 | 0 | 0 | 1996 | 27–22 | 55.1% | #54 | 1,711 | 0 | 0 |
| 1993 | 51–27 | 65.4% | #10 | 1,936 | 0 | 0 | 1997 | 20–26 | 43.5% | #88 | 1,695 | 0 | 0 |
| 1994 | 29–28 | 50.9% | #51 | 1,767 | 0 | 0 | 1998 | 28–27 | 50.9% | #42 | 1,752 | 0 | 0 |
| 1995 | 24–27 | 47.1% | #54 | 1,760 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 33–27 | 55.0% | #20 | 1,763 | 0 | 0 |
| 1996 | 38–21 | 64.4% | #21 | 1,805 | 0 | 1 | 2000 | 3–23 | 11.5% | #213 | 1,545 | 0 | 0 |
| 1997 | 37–25 | 59.7% | #20 | 1,834 | 0 | 2 | 2001 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #125 | 1,534 | 0 | 0 |
| 1998 | 38–26 | 59.4% | #18 | 1,764 | 0 | 2 | 2002 | 13–17 | 43.3% | #67 | 1,623 | 0 | 0 |
| 1999 | 37–28 | 56.9% | #13 | 1,795 | 0 | 3 | 2003 | 34–25 | 57.6% | #29 | 1,723 | 0 | 0 |
| 2000 | 32–19 | 62.7% | #16 | 1,760 | 0 | 5 | 2004 | 39–25 | 60.9% | #20 | 1,784 | 0 | 1 |
| 2001 | 17–22 | 43.6% | #84 | 1,657 | 0 | 5 | 2005 | 21–24 | 46.7% | #75 | 1,665 | 0 | 1 |
| 2002 | 10–16 | 38.5% | #119 | 1,618 | 0 | 5 | 2006 | 19–26 | 42.2% | #73 | 1,627 | 0 | 1 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2007 | 24–28 | 46.2% | #77 | 1,650 | 0 | 1 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2008 | 13–19 | 40.6% | #76 | 1,657 | 0 | 1 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2009 | 2–9 | 18.2% | #295 | 1,526 | 0 | 1 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2010 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #1517 | 1,480 | 0 | 1 |