H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 19:16 UTC
Daniel Evans vs Ernests Gulbis H2H: 0-1
Ernests Gulbis holds a 1–0 lead over Daniel Evans in their ATP head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Ernests Gulbis leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Ernests Gulbis won the 2014 Doha third round 6-2 4-6 6-0.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
Great Britain
Age 36
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
LAT
Age 37
Right-Handed
193 cm / 6'4"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 1, 2014* | Doha | ATP 250 | R32 | Hard | Ernests Gulbis | 6-2 4-6 6-0 | Daniel Evans | 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 Evans | #385 | #21 | 2,195 | 1,927 | 140 | 160 | 46.7% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| Ernests Gulbis | #893 | #10 | 2,725 | 2,139 | 221 | 232 | 48.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 6 |
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 Evans | Ernests Gulbis | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2006 | 3–1 | 75.0% | #141 | 1,556 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2008 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #477 | 1,465 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 6–14 | 30.0% | #61 | 1,638 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2009 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #261 | 1,441 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 22–20 | 52.4% | #53 | 1,815 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2010 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #363 | 1,505 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 17–26 | 39.5% | #90 | 1,696 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2011 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #342 | 1,490 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 29–20 | 59.2% | #24 | 1,845 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 2012 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #297 | 1,533 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 18–22 | 45.0% | #61 | 1,774 | 0 | 2 |
| 23 | 2013 | 4–2 | 66.7% | #150 | 1,689 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 12–17 | 41.4% | #136 | 1,727 | 0 | 2 |
| 24 | 2014 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #305 | 1,677 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 32–18 | 64.0% | #24 | 1,939 | 0 | 4 |
| 25 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2014 | 41–21 | 66.1% | #13 | 1,917 | 0 | 6 |
| 26 | 2016 | 9–8 | 52.9% | #66 | 1,790 | 0 | 0 | 2015 | 11–24 | 31.4% | #81 | 1,765 | 0 | 6 |
| 27 | 2017 | 11–10 | 52.4% | #133 | 1,820 | 0 | 0 | 2016 | 7–14 | 33.3% | #151 | 1,785 | 0 | 6 |
| 28 | 2018 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #192 | 1,787 | 0 | 0 | 2017 | 6–8 | 42.9% | #199 | 1,716 | 0 | 6 |
| 29 | 2019 | 18–18 | 50.0% | #42 | 1,817 | 0 | 0 | 2018 | 9–6 | 60.0% | #95 | 1,813 | 0 | 6 |
| 30 | 2020 | 16–13 | 55.2% | #32 | 1,858 | 0 | 0 | 2019 | 6–17 | 26.1% | #226 | 1,533 | 0 | 6 |
| 31 | 2021 | 23–22 | 51.1% | #25 | 1,836 | 0 | 1 | 2020 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #181 | 1,562 | 0 | 6 |
| 32 | 2022 | 27–26 | 50.9% | #27 | 1,850 | 0 | 1 | 2021 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #191 | 1,509 | 0 | 6 |
| 33 | 2023 | 15–23 | 39.5% | #38 | 1,761 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 34 | 2024 | 6–19 | 24.0% | #164 | 1,704 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 35 | 2025 | 7–6 | 53.8% | #185 | 1,724 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |