H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Daniel Gimeno-Traver vs Maximo Gonzalez H2H: 1-0
Daniel Gimeno-Traver holds a 1–0 lead over Maximo Gonzalez in their ATP head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Daniel Gimeno-Traver leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Daniel Gimeno-Traver won the 2009 Houston third round 6-4 3-6 6-1.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
ESP
Age 40
Right-Handed
183 cm / 6'0"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
ARG
Age 42
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 9, 2009* | Houston | ATP 250 | R32 | Clay | Daniel Gimeno-Traver | 6-4 3-6 6-1 | Maximo Gonzalez | 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 Gimeno-Traver | #1,222 | #48 | 998 | 1,809 | 95 | 169 | 36.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Maximo Gonzalez | #467 | #58 | 992 | 1,702 | 28 | 60 | 31.8% | 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 Gimeno-Traver | Maximo Gonzalez | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 18 | 2004 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #180 | 1,481 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 2005 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #192 | 1,503 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 2006 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #267 | 1,505 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 22 | 2008 | 7–7 | 50.0% | #90 | 1,631 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 23 | 2009 | 9–20 | 31.0% | #72 | 1,640 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #121 | 1,511 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2010 | 17–23 | 42.5% | #56 | 1,732 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 4–5 | 44.4% | #132 | 1,586 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2011 | 8–23 | 25.8% | #107 | 1,644 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 11–12 | 47.8% | #66 | 1,671 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2012 | 6–12 | 33.3% | #70 | 1,620 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 3–9 | 25.0% | #141 | 1,605 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2013 | 14–27 | 34.1% | #77 | 1,576 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 3–12 | 20.0% | #121 | 1,561 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2014 | 11–20 | 35.5% | #112 | 1,625 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #347 | 1,498 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2015 | 13–18 | 41.9% | #98 | 1,609 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #157 | 1,564 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2016 | 8–10 | 44.4% | #115 | 1,684 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #103 | 1,642 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | 2017 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #366 | 1,630 | 0 | 0 | 2015 | 0–6 | 0.0% | #147 | 1,578 | 0 | 0 |
| 32 | 2018 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #189 | 1,611 | 0 | 0 | 2016 | 2–5 | 28.6% | #150 | 1,553 | 0 | 0 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2017 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #392 | 1,545 | 0 | 0 |
| 41 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2025 | 0–2 | 0.0% | — | 1,509 | 0 | 0 |