H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Chip Hooper vs Roscoe Tanner H2H: 2-1
Chip Hooper holds a 2–1 lead over Roscoe Tanner in their ATP head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on carpet, while Chip Hooper leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Roscoe Tanner won the 1984 Memphis second round 4-6 6-3 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.
USA
Age 67
Right-Handed
198 cm / 6'6"
H2H
2
–
1
3 main draw meetings
USA
Age 74
Left-Handed
183 cm / 6'0"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 8, 1984* | Memphis | ATP 250 | R64 | Carpet | Roscoe Tanner | 4-6 6-3 6-4 | Chip Hooper | Match data |
| Sep 4, 1982* | US Open | Grand Slam | R64 | Hard | Chip Hooper | 6-7 7-6 4-6 7-5 7-6 | Roscoe Tanner | Match data |
| Jan 29, 1982* | Philadelphia | ATP 250 | R16 | Carpet | Chip Hooper | 6-4 7-6 | Roscoe Tanner | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chip Hooper | #1,046 | #17 | 0 | 1,854 | 104 | 119 | 46.6% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Roscoe Tanner | #789 | #4 | 0 | 2,158 | 595 | 298 | 66.6% | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 15 | 17 |
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 | Chip Hooper | Roscoe Tanner | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1969 | 0–2 | 0.0% | — | 1,479 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1970 | 0–9 | 0.0% | — | 1,417 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1971 | 16–10 | 61.5% | — | 1,703 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1972 | 29–14 | 67.4% | — | 1,911 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1980 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #390 | 1,500 | 0 | 0 | 1973 | 45–30 | 60.0% | #24 | 1,812 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1981 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #390 | 1,538 | 0 | 0 | 1974 | 66–28 | 70.2% | #14 | 1,959 | 0 | 2 |
| 23 | 1982 | 34–24 | 58.6% | #32 | 1,766 | 0 | 0 | 1975 | 65–24 | 73.0% | #9 | 1,965 | 0 | 5 |
| 24 | 1983 | 24–24 | 50.0% | #59 | 1,739 | 0 | 0 | 1976 | 70–28 | 71.4% | #11 | 2,012 | 0 | 9 |
| 25 | 1984 | 18–21 | 46.2% | #96 | 1,600 | 0 | 0 | 1977 | 52–30 | 63.4% | #15 | 1,880 | 1 | 11 |
| 26 | 1985 | 14–18 | 43.8% | #114 | 1,676 | 0 | 0 | 1978 | 59–24 | 71.1% | #11 | 1,935 | 1 | 13 |
| 27 | 1986 | 5–12 | 29.4% | #222 | 1,577 | 0 | 0 | 1979 | 61–19 | 76.2% | #5 | 2,025 | 1 | 15 |
| 28 | 1987 | 6–11 | 35.3% | #150 | 1,552 | 0 | 0 | 1980 | 42–16 | 72.4% | #13 | 1,993 | 1 | 16 |
| 29 | 1988 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #561 | 1,506 | 0 | 0 | 1981 | 51–22 | 69.9% | #12 | 1,901 | 1 | 17 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1982 | 20–17 | 54.1% | #43 | 1,779 | 1 | 17 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1983 | 16–13 | 55.2% | #36 | 1,872 | 1 | 17 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1984 | 3–11 | 21.4% | #249 | 1,679 | 1 | 17 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1985 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #794 | 1,661 | 1 | 17 |