H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
David Wheaton vs Jaime Oncins H2H: 0-1
Jaime Oncins holds a 1–0 lead over David Wheaton in their ATP head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Jaime Oncins leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Jaime Oncins won the 1991 Umag third round 6-4 6-3.
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 57
Right-Handed
193 cm / 6'4"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
BRA
Age 56
Right-Handed
196 cm / 6'5"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 16, 1991* | Umag | ATP 250 | R32 | Clay | Jaime Oncins | 6-4 6-3 | David Wheaton | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| David Wheaton | #874 | #12 | 1,506 | 1,984 | 231 | 190 | 54.9% | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 3 |
| Jaime Oncins | #1,034 | #34 | 773 | 1,796 | 61 | 86 | 41.5% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
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 Wheaton | Jaime Oncins | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 1986 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #785 | 1,492 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 1987 | 3–3 | 50.0% | #345 | 1,525 | 0 | 0 | 1988 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #314 | 1,493 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1988 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #441 | 1,494 | 0 | 0 | 1989 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #263 | 1,471 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1989 | 18–16 | 52.9% | #66 | 1,683 | 0 | 0 | 1990 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #113 | 1,443 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1990 | 35–20 | 63.6% | #27 | 1,873 | 0 | 1 | 1991 | 22–17 | 56.4% | #64 | 1,677 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1991 | 33–19 | 63.5% | #17 | 1,955 | 0 | 2 | 1992 | 24–18 | 57.1% | #48 | 1,765 | 0 | 2 |
| 23 | 1992 | 30–23 | 56.6% | #44 | 1,804 | 0 | 2 | 1993 | 11–23 | 32.4% | #133 | 1,578 | 0 | 2 |
| 24 | 1993 | 27–25 | 51.9% | #54 | 1,730 | 0 | 2 | 1994 | 1–7 | 12.5% | #230 | 1,502 | 0 | 2 |
| 25 | 1994 | 28–18 | 60.9% | #39 | 1,782 | 0 | 3 | 1995 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #222 | 1,505 | 0 | 2 |
| 26 | 1995 | 28–24 | 53.8% | #44 | 1,705 | 0 | 3 | 1996 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #160 | 1,488 | 0 | 2 |
| 27 | 1996 | 12–15 | 44.4% | #131 | 1,704 | 0 | 3 | 1997 | 0–6 | 0.0% | #166 | 1,436 | 0 | 2 |
| 28 | 1997 | 10–8 | 55.6% | #148 | 1,704 | 0 | 3 | 1998 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #223 | 1,448 | 0 | 2 |
| 29 | 1998 | 6–10 | 37.5% | #229 | 1,620 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 1999 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #565 | 1,582 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 2000 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #313 | 1,562 | 0 | 3 | 2001 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #1031 | 1,435 | 0 | 2 |