H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 19:16 UTC
Daniel Brands vs Robert Kendrick H2H: 1-1
Daniel Brands and Robert Kendrick are tied 1–1 in their ATP head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Robert Kendrick leads 1–0 on clay, while Daniel Brands leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Daniel Brands won the 2009 Vienna third round 7-6(5) 7-5.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
GER
Age 39
Right-Handed
196 cm / 6'5"
H2H
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
USA
Age 46
Right-Handed
191 cm / 6'3"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 29, 2009* | Vienna | ATP 500 | R32 | Hard | Daniel Brands | 7-6(5) 7-5 | Robert Kendrick | Match data |
| May 27, 2009* | Roland Garros | Grand Slam | R128 | Clay | Robert Kendrick | 6-7(7) 7-5 7-6(11) 4-6 6-3 | Daniel Brands | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Daniel Brands | #1,055 | #51 | 896 | 1,886 | 57 | 92 | 38.3% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Robert Kendrick | #1,118 | #69 | 968 | 1,729 | 35 | 78 | 31.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
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 | Daniel Brands | Robert Kendrick | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 19 | 2007 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #220 | 1,491 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 2008 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #150 | 1,539 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 21 | 2009 | 7–5 | 58.3% | #92 | 1,645 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 22 | 2010 | 9–19 | 32.1% | #104 | 1,670 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 23 | 2011 | 4–11 | 26.7% | #110 | 1,690 | 0 | 0 | 2003 | 6–10 | 37.5% | #134 | 1,531 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2012 | 5–8 | 38.5% | #153 | 1,689 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 4–4 | 50.0% | #160 | 1,551 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2013 | 22–22 | 50.0% | #54 | 1,815 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #339 | 1,497 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2014 | 2–11 | 15.4% | #329 | 1,713 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 4–5 | 44.4% | #87 | 1,622 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2015 | 2–1 | 66.7% | #159 | 1,729 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 5–18 | 21.7% | #105 | 1,526 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2016 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #168 | 1,660 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 3–9 | 25.0% | #97 | 1,605 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2017 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #320 | 1,662 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 9–16 | 36.0% | #142 | 1,616 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2018 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #182 | 1,615 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #115 | 1,655 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | 2019 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #465 | 1,604 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 4–9 | 30.8% | #224 | 1,624 | 0 | 0 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2012 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #449 | 1,651 | 0 | 0 |