H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Denis Istomin vs Tobias Kamke H2H: 1-0
Denis Istomin holds a 1–0 lead over Tobias Kamke in their ATP head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Denis Istomin leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Denis Istomin won the 2013 US Open second round 6-4 6-2 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.
UZB
Age 39
Right-Handed
188 cm / 6'2"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
GER
Age 40
Right-Handed
178 cm / 5'10"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 31, 2021 | Roland Garros | Grand Slam | Q3 | Clay | Denis Istomin | 6-4 7-6(5) | Tobias Kamke | Match data |
| Aug 29, 2013* | US Open | Grand Slam | R64 | Hard | Denis Istomin | 6-4 6-2 6-2 | Tobias Kamke | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Denis Istomin | #1,509 | #33 | 1,217 | 1,900 | 191 | 245 | 43.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| Tobias Kamke | #1,114 | #64 | 744 | 1,764 | 60 | 99 | 37.7% | 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 | Denis Istomin | Tobias Kamke | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 19 | 2006 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #200 | 1,474 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 21 | 2008 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #105 | 1,559 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #210 | 1,502 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2009 | 13–17 | 43.3% | #102 | 1,636 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #243 | 1,508 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2010 | 29–29 | 50.0% | #40 | 1,767 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 24 | 2011 | 10–21 | 32.3% | #73 | 1,665 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 7–8 | 46.7% | #67 | 1,638 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2012 | 26–29 | 47.3% | #43 | 1,732 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 15–23 | 39.5% | #96 | 1,736 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2013 | 30–29 | 50.8% | #45 | 1,808 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 6–18 | 25.0% | #98 | 1,626 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2014 | 24–23 | 51.1% | #49 | 1,853 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 15–20 | 42.9% | #74 | 1,723 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2015 | 20–23 | 46.5% | #61 | 1,788 | 0 | 1 | 2014 | 9–15 | 37.5% | #97 | 1,670 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2016 | 6–19 | 24.0% | #121 | 1,711 | 0 | 1 | 2015 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #277 | 1,584 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2017 | 15–18 | 45.5% | #63 | 1,724 | 0 | 2 | 2016 | 5–5 | 50.0% | #118 | 1,707 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | 2018 | 12–18 | 40.0% | #92 | 1,679 | 0 | 2 | 2017 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #233 | 1,616 | 0 | 0 |
| 32 | 2019 | 3–11 | 21.4% | #177 | 1,567 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 2020 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #184 | 1,545 | 0 | 2 | 2019 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #242 | 1,567 | 0 | 0 |
| 34 | 2021 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #254 | 1,545 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 35 | 2022 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #467 | 1,577 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |