H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 17:48 UTC
Dick Crealy vs Vladimir Zednik H2H: 2-2
Dick Crealy and Vladimir Zednik are tied 2–2 in their ATP head-to-head. Across 4 main-draw meetings, Vladimir Zednik leads 2–1 on clay, while Dick Crealy leads 1–0 on carpet. Most recently, Dick Crealy won the 1976 Munich third round 6-3 6-4.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
AUS
Age 81
Right-Handed
191 cm / 6'3"
H2H
2
–
2
4 main draw meetings
CZE
Age 79
Right-Handed
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 7, 1976* | Munich | ATP 250 | R32 | Clay | Dick Crealy | 6-3 6-4 | Vladimir Zednik | Match data |
| Apr 19, 1973* | Charlotte Wct | ATP 250 | R32 | Clay | Vladimir Zednik | 6-4 6-4 | Dick Crealy | Match data |
| Mar 22, 1973* | Washington Wct | ATP 250 | R32 | Carpet | Dick Crealy | 7-6 6-1 | Vladimir Zednik | Match data |
| May 17, 1972* | Brussels | ATP 250 | R32 | Clay | Vladimir Zednik | 6-2 6-1 | Dick Crealy | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dick Crealy | #509 | #33 | 0 | 1,904 | 335 | 317 | 51.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| Vladimir Zednik | #300 | #35 | 0 | 1,753 | 113 | 157 | 41.9% | 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 | Dick Crealy | Vladimir Zednik | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 21 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1968 | 1–1 | 50.0% | — | 1,500 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1969 | 4–2 | 66.7% | — | 1,562 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 1968 | 31–16 | 66.0% | — | 1,650 | 0 | 0 | 1970 | 6–7 | 46.2% | — | 1,577 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 1969 | 30–23 | 56.6% | — | 1,641 | 0 | 0 | 1971 | 17–20 | 45.9% | — | 1,623 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 1970 | 32–21 | 60.4% | — | 1,700 | 0 | 1 | 1972 | 19–20 | 48.7% | — | 1,647 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 1971 | 10–23 | 30.3% | — | 1,609 | 0 | 1 | 1973 | 14–24 | 36.8% | #90 | 1,613 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 1972 | 18–14 | 56.2% | — | 1,718 | 0 | 1 | 1974 | 12–19 | 38.7% | #93 | 1,629 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 1973 | 31–33 | 48.4% | #51 | 1,625 | 0 | 1 | 1975 | 3–11 | 21.4% | #157 | 1,601 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 1974 | 41–40 | 50.6% | #71 | 1,709 | 0 | 1 | 1976 | 5–10 | 33.3% | #106 | 1,585 | 0 | 1 |
| 30 | 1975 | 41–37 | 52.6% | #56 | 1,734 | 0 | 2 | 1977 | 9–13 | 40.9% | #75 | 1,637 | 0 | 1 |
| 31 | 1976 | 46–34 | 57.5% | #38 | 1,779 | 0 | 2 | 1978 | 22–22 | 50.0% | #70 | 1,658 | 0 | 2 |
| 32 | 1977 | 31–30 | 50.8% | #68 | 1,670 | 0 | 2 | 1979 | 1–7 | 12.5% | #300 | 1,580 | 0 | 2 |
| 33 | 1978 | 19–33 | 36.5% | #131 | 1,565 | 0 | 2 | 1980 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,570 | 0 | 2 |
| 34 | 1979 | 1–10 | 9.1% | #274 | 1,497 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 35 | 1980 | 3–2 | 60.0% | #309 | 1,509 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 36 | 1981 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #309 | 1,507 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |