H2H data updated: 2026-09-02 00:00 UTC

David Ferrer vs Takao Suzuki H2H: 1-0

David Ferrer holds a 1–0 lead over Takao Suzuki in their ATP head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, David Ferrer leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, David Ferrer won the 2008 Japan Open third round 4-6 6-3 6-2.

Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.

David Ferrer
ESP Age 44 Right-Handed 175 cm / 5'9"
H2H
1 – 0
1 main draw meetings
Takao Suzuki
JPN Age 49 Right-Handed 175 cm / 5'9"

H2H Match Log

PlayerScorePlayerMatch DataDateRoundTournamentCategorySurface
David Ferrer #5 4-6 6-3 6-2 Takao Suzuki #593 Match data Oct 3, 2008* R16 Japan Open International Series Gold → modern equivalent ATP 500 Hard
Takao Suzuki #115 6-3 6-4 David Ferrer #146 Match data May 28, 2002* Q2 Q Roland Garros Grand Slam Clay

1 qualifying meeting shown in the table; qualifying is excluded from the H2H score. Estimated match date where the exact historical date is unavailable. Arrows show an edition's recorded category and documented modern equivalent; unresolved editions keep their recorded category. Asterisked totals include editions mapped from documented historical predecessor categories. Mapping details.

Career Comparison

Player Current Peak Pts Elo W L Win % GS 1000 including documented historical predecessor categories Finals 500 including documented historical predecessor categories 250 including documented historical predecessor categories Titles
David Ferrer #224 #3 7,220 2,263 703 371 65.5% 0 1 0 10 16 27
Takao Suzuki #1,016 #102 470 1,669 23 34 40.4% 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 David Ferrer Takao Suzuki
YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles
18 — — — — — — — 1995 0–2 0.0% #487 1,473 0 0
19 — — — — — — — 1996 1–1 50.0% #517 1,493 0 0
20 2002 10–6 62.5% #59 1,610 0 1 1997 1–1 50.0% #272 1,506 0 0
21 2003 20–27 42.6% #71 1,671 0 1 1998 2–2 50.0% #115 1,544 0 0
22 2004 29–31 48.3% #49 1,654 0 1 1999 1–9 10.0% #262 1,462 0 0
23 2005 41–28 59.4% #14 1,777 0 1 2000 1–1 50.0% #160 1,477 0 0
24 2006 37–24 60.7% #14 1,816 0 2 2001 3–2 60.0% #225 1,516 0 0
25 2007 57–22 72.2% #5 2,038 0 5 2002 2–4 33.3% #136 1,506 0 0
26 2008 40–21 65.6% #12 1,837 0 7 2003 4–3 57.1% #205 1,609 0 0
27 2009 40–24 62.5% #17 1,871 0 7 2004 2–3 40.0% #212 1,610 0 0
28 2010 58–23 71.6% #7 2,035 0 9 2005 1–2 33.3% #272 1,588 0 0
29 2011 55–19 74.3% #5 2,109 0 11 2006 3–1 75.0% #471 1,619 0 0
30 2012 70–15 82.4% #5 2,228 0 18 2007 0–1 0.0% #241 1,543 0 0
31 2013 63–24 72.4% #3 2,092 0 20 2008 2–1 66.7% #509 1,543 0 0
32 2014 55–24 69.6% #10 2,060 0 21 2009 0–1 0.0% #282 1,541 0 0
33 2015 53–16 76.8% #7 2,127 0 26 — — — — — — —
34 2016 34–23 59.6% #21 1,961 0 26 — — — — — — —
35 2017 25–21 54.3% #37 1,907 0 27 — — — — — — —
36 2018 8–17 32.0% #125 1,708 0 27 — — — — — — —
37 2019 8–6 57.1% #224 1,803 0 27 — — — — — — —

Surface Results by Age

Seasons are aligned by the age each player spent most of that calendar year. Results cover completed main-draw matches. Bold green marks the higher win percentage when both players have at least 5 matches on that surface at the aligned age.

Age David Ferrer Takao Suzuki
Yr HardClayGrassCarpet Yr HardClayGrassCarpet
W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win %
18 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1995 0 1 1 0.0% — — — — — — — — 0 1 1 0.0%
19 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1996 1 1 2 50.0% — — — — — — — — — — — —
20 2002 0 1 1 0.0% 10 4 14 71.4% — — — — 0 1 1 0.0% 1997 1 1 2 50.0% — — — — — — — — — — — —
21 2003 6 10 16 37.5% 13 16 29 44.8% 1 1 2 50.0% — — — — 1998 2 2 4 50.0% — — — — — — — — — — — —
22 2004 3 10 13 23.1% 22 15 37 59.5% 1 3 4 25.0% 3 3 6 50.0% 1999 1 7 8 12.5% — — — — 0 2 2 0.0% — — — —
23 2005 16 11 27 59.3% 23 14 37 62.2% 0 1 1 0.0% 2 2 4 50.0% 2000 1 1 2 50.0% — — — — — — — — — — — —
24 2006 17 13 30 56.7% 15 7 22 68.2% 3 1 4 75.0% 2 3 5 40.0% 2001 3 2 5 60.0% — — — — — — — — — — — —
25 2007 37 14 51 72.5% 19 7 26 73.1% 1 1 2 50.0% — — — — 2002 2 4 6 33.3% — — — — — — — — — — — —
26 2008 15 14 29 51.7% 18 6 24 75.0% 7 1 8 87.5% — — — — 2003 3 2 5 60.0% — — — — 1 1 2 50.0% — — — —
27 2009 22 14 36 61.1% 14 8 22 63.6% 4 2 6 66.7% — — — — 2004 2 2 4 50.0% — — — — 0 1 1 0.0% — — — —
28 2010 26 15 41 63.4% 29 7 36 80.6% 3 1 4 75.0% — — — — 2005 1 2 3 33.3% — — — — — — — — — — — —
29 2011 30 12 42 71.4% 22 6 28 78.6% 3 1 4 75.0% — — — — 2006 3 1 4 75.0% — — — — — — — — — — — —
30 2012 31 8 39 79.5% 28 5 33 84.8% 11 2 13 84.6% — — — — 2007 0 1 1 0.0% — — — — — — — — — — — —
31 2013 37 16 53 69.8% 22 6 28 78.6% 4 2 6 66.7% — — — — 2008 2 1 3 66.7% — — — — — — — — — — — —
32 2014 29 15 44 65.9% 25 8 33 75.8% 1 1 2 50.0% — — — — 2009 0 1 1 0.0% — — — — — — — — — — — —
33 2015 34 10 44 77.3% 19 5 24 79.2% 0 1 1 0.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
34 2016 17 13 30 56.7% 15 7 22 68.2% 2 3 5 40.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
35 2017 11 10 21 52.4% 12 8 20 60.0% 2 3 5 40.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
36 2018 6 10 16 37.5% 1 5 6 16.7% 1 2 3 33.3% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
37 2019 4 3 7 57.1% 4 3 7 57.1% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Career — 341 199 540 63.1% 311 137 448 69.4% 44 26 70 62.9% 7 9 16 43.8% — 22 29 51 43.1% — — — — 1 4 5 20.0% 0 1 1 0.0%

Performance Progression by Age

Seasons are aligned by the age each player spent most of that calendar year. Detailed serve and return statistics available for 1,056/1,074 of David Ferrer's and 24/24 of Takao Suzuki's main draw matches. Sample is shown as matches with detailed serve and return statistics / total main draw matches. Bold green marks the stronger value when both stat samples contain at least 5 matches; lower is better for DFs/M.

Age David Ferrer Takao Suzuki
Yr Sample Aces/M DFs/M 1st Sv% 1st Pts% 2nd Pts% BP Saved% BP Conv% Svc Pts% Ret Pts% Yr Sample Aces/M DFs/M 1st Sv% 1st Pts% 2nd Pts% BP Saved% BP Conv% Svc Pts% Ret Pts%
20 2002 15/16 1.1 2.9 60.6% 66.6% 52.3% 44.8% 46.2% 60.7% 43.0% — —/— — — — — — — — — —
21 2003 45/47 2.0 3.8 59.2% 63.2% 46.7% 53.8% 44.3% 56.4% 39.3% — —/— — — — — — — — — —
22 2004 60/60 2.5 2.7 63.1% 64.2% 49.4% 56.1% 44.4% 58.3% 40.5% — —/— — — — — — — — — —
23 2005 68/69 2.5 2.6 64.1% 65.3% 51.4% 54.6% 48.0% 60.5% 42.3% — —/— — — — — — — — — —
24 2006 61/61 2.5 3.0 63.5% 66.0% 49.4% 52.9% 47.3% 59.9% 42.3% — —/— — — — — — — — — —
25 2007 79/79 2.9 1.7 65.4% 69.1% 53.5% 57.6% 52.1% 63.7% 44.3% — —/— — — — — — — — — —
26 2008 60/61 2.7 1.6 66.1% 69.0% 54.5% 55.7% 43.0% 64.2% 41.9% 2003 7/7 7.7 3.1 58.1% 73.1% 52.8% 74.9% 39.7% 65.0% 34.3%
27 2009 62/64 3.1 2.9 61.2% 70.2% 52.9% 58.9% 49.4% 63.4% 42.7% 2004 5/5 11.8 3.8 62.6% 75.8% 48.5% 49.7% 52.6% 65.6% 32.4%
28 2010 81/81 3.0 1.7 65.1% 70.7% 56.5% 63.9% 48.7% 65.7% 43.1% 2005 3/3 10.3 2.7 64.5% 73.2% 58.4% 82.3% 63.9% 67.6% 29.6%
29 2011 74/74 3.6 2.7 60.7% 72.9% 56.8% 65.7% 48.1% 66.6% 42.8% 2006 4/4 12.8 2.5 62.7% 80.9% 66.7% 87.5% 50.0% 75.5% 29.2%
30 2012 82/85 3.3 2.1 63.4% 73.9% 57.8% 65.2% 48.2% 68.0% 42.7% 2007 1/1 12.0 4.0 54.3% 76.5% 60.5% 50.0% 14.3% 69.1% 32.4%
31 2013 84/87 3.2 2.3 62.9% 70.4% 53.4% 57.1% 44.8% 64.2% 42.6% 2008 3/3 12.0 2.3 60.0% 77.6% 50.9% 68.4% 44.4% 66.4% 33.0%
32 2014 78/79 2.2 2.5 62.9% 69.9% 53.7% 61.3% 43.8% 63.8% 43.3% 2009 1/1 4.0 2.0 60.9% 57.1% 72.2% 0.0% 0.0% 63.0% 26.7%
33 2015 69/69 2.2 2.9 62.4% 70.5% 54.2% 60.3% 47.6% 64.4% 43.6% — —/— — — — — — — — — —
34 2016 54/57 2.8 3.2 61.3% 70.5% 53.7% 63.4% 43.6% 63.8% 40.3% — —/— — — — — — — — — —
35 2017 45/46 2.6 4.6 59.1% 70.6% 50.9% 61.7% 39.6% 62.4% 39.6% — —/— — — — — — — — — —
36 2018 25/25 2.0 3.8 60.7% 66.1% 49.2% 57.7% 36.2% 59.1% 39.5% — —/— — — — — — — — — —
37 2019 14/14 1.6 2.8 64.7% 67.0% 55.6% 54.9% 39.1% 62.7% 41.7% — —/— — — — — — — — — —
Career — 1,056/1,074 2.7 2.6 62.8% 69.2% 53.3% 59.2% 46.2% 63.2% 42.3% — 24/57 10.3 3.0 60.8% 75.0% 55.8% 67.7% 45.0% 67.5% 31.9%

Advanced Statistics Comparison by Age

Seasons are aligned by the age each player spent most of that calendar year. Metrics are precomputed from eligible main-draw results; point-stat values use the available detailed sample. Bold green marks the stronger value when both underlying samples are sufficient. Lower is better for Schedule because a negative value means a tougher schedule. Career Schedule is normalized per 100 matches.

Age David Ferrer Takao Suzuki
Yr Elo P+ Serve+ Return+ PD TPW% Hard Elo Clay Elo Grass Elo Set Win % Set Margin Dec. Set Tiebreak Pressure+ Schedule Yr Elo P+ Serve+ Return+ PD TPW% Hard Elo Clay Elo Grass Elo Set Win % Set Margin Dec. Set Tiebreak Pressure+ Schedule
18 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1995 1473 98.2 — — — — — — — 0.0% -2.50 — — — +0.09
19 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1996 1493 109.1 — — — — — — — 50.0% -0.25 — — — -0.16
20 2002 1611 129.0 -0.14 +2.61 1.094 51.9% — +85 — 59.5% +1.03 3–2 (60%) 1–0 — +0.80 1997 1507 105.1 — — — — — — — 50.0% -0.25 — — — -0.04
21 2003 1672 133.1 -4.21 +1.79 0.902 48.2% -135 +48 — 40.5% -0.84 7–3 (70%) 5–4 (56%) — -2.35 1998 1545 118.3 — — — — +30 — — 44.4% -1.00 1–0 1–0 — -0.29
22 2004 1655 133.7 -3.20 +2.62 0.972 49.4% -121 +132 -112 46.3% -0.23 13–7 (65%) 8–11 (42%) — +0.43 1999 1462 115.1 — — — — +53 — — 30.0% -1.20 0–4 (0%) 1–6 (14%) — -0.13
23 2005 1777 152.3 -0.65 +4.57 1.071 51.2% -27 +72 — 58.3% +0.68 11–12 (48%) 6–7 (46%) — +1.45 2000 1477 103.1 — — — — — — — 50.0% -0.83 1–1 — — +0.17
24 2006 1816 148.0 -1.48 +4.87 1.055 51.0% -62 +114 -166 57.8% +0.52 13–6 (68%) 8–9 (47%) — +1.00 2001 1517 105.7 — — — — +20 — — 50.0% -0.21 2–0 2–1 (67%) — +0.26
25 2007 2038 165.7 +0.90 +7.85 1.222 53.9% +1 -58 — 66.5% +1.31 12–4 (75%) 13–12 (52%) — -0.11 2002 1506 104.2 — — — — +14 — — 35.7% -0.93 1–1 1–1 — +0.27
26 2008 1838 152.2 +1.24 +4.88 1.168 52.6% -35 +228 -34 60.9% +0.75 10–6 (63%) 11–8 (58%) — +2.27 2003 1609 114.1 -2.01 -0.21 0.982 49.9% -33 — — 56.3% -0.13 — 4–1 (80%) — +0.23
27 2009 1871 159.3 +0.54 +5.75 1.169 52.8% +17 +139 -50 59.8% +0.90 14–10 (58%) 4–13 (24%) — +0.88 2004 1611 113.5 +1.14 -2.01 0.942 49.1% +12 — — 42.9% -0.86 1–1 4–2 (67%) — -0.08
28 2010 2036 167.1 +2.99 +6.37 1.257 54.2% -69 +114 -169 67.4% +1.08 11–10 (52%) 11–9 (55%) — +0.59 2005 1588 114.1 -0.19 +2.68 0.913 49.3% +55 — — 44.4% +0.22 0–1 0–1 — -0.25
29 2011 2109 173.9 +4.03 +6.13 1.283 54.5% +5 +84 -191 69.8% +1.52 12–7 (63%) 9–9 (50%) — +1.39 2006 1619 124.5 +2.96 -0.08 1.193 53.1% +51 — — 63.6% +1.28 2–1 (67%) 2–3 (40%) — +0.05
30 2012 2229 173.7 +4.91 +6.11 1.332 55.1% -6 +114 -152 75.9% +1.67 14–1 (93%) 20–12 (63%) — +1.07 2007 1544 100.8 -3.25 +0.61 1.049 50.0% — — — 33.3% -0.33 0–1 — — -0.05
31 2013 2093 174.2 +1.94 +6.08 1.191 53.3% +31 +273 -20 64.6% +1.16 20–8 (71%) 12–9 (57%) — +1.12 2008 1543 102.7 +1.12 -0.43 0.981 50.2% +54 — — 62.5% -0.13 1–1 3–0 (100%) — +0.15
32 2014 2060 172.8 +1.07 +6.87 1.198 53.5% +10 +218 — 65.5% +1.12 15–11 (58%) 17–12 (59%) — +2.77 2009 1541 112.1 +2.43 +1.00 0.722 42.5% — — — 0.0% -2.50 — — — -0.10
33 2015 2127 174.9 +1.19 +7.08 1.223 53.6% +32 +170 — 67.6% +1.31 15–2 (88%) 12–10 (55%) — +3.35 2010 1546 106.1 — — — — — — — — — — — — —
34 2016 1961 160.9 -0.03 +3.83 1.112 51.7% +65 +185 -21 57.1% +0.66 10–8 (56%) 8–12 (40%) — +1.83 2011 1528 98.4 — — — — — — — — — — — — —
35 2017 1907 153.4 -0.46 +2.91 1.054 50.7% +10 +112 -23 49.2% +0.13 12–6 (67%) 5–9 (36%) — +0.54 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
36 2018 1708 138.6 -2.32 +3.21 0.966 49.2% +118 +153 +130 41.7% -0.43 0–6 (0%) 5–5 (50%) — -0.57 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
37 2019 1804 151.4 -0.33 +3.86 1.116 51.9% +47 +91 — 60.0% +0.57 2–2 (50%) 3–2 (60%) — -0.85 2014 1512 99.2 — — — — — — — — — — — — —
38 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 2015 1508 95.2 — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Career — 2264 167.8 +0.80 +5.33 1.149 52.6% -5 +126 -81 61.4% +0.85 194–111 (64%) 158–153 (51%) 102.5 +1.46 — 1669 118.5 +0.23 -0.15 0.981 49.9% +27 — — 43.2% -0.56 9–11 (45%) 18–15 (55%) 105.7 +0.21

Career Rivalries

Each player's five most-played main-draw opponents. The current matchup is highlighted when it appears in a player's top five.