H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 19:16 UTC
Dominic Thiem vs Jarkko Nieminen H2H: 1-1
Dominic Thiem and Jarkko Nieminen are tied 1–1 in their ATP head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on hard courts. Most recently, Dominic Thiem won the 2014 Rotterdam third round 6-4 4-6 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.
AUT
Age 32
Right-Handed
185 cm / 6'1"
H2H
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
FIN
Age 44
Left-Handed
185 cm / 6'1"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 13, 2014* | Rotterdam | ATP 500 | R32 | Hard | Dominic Thiem | 6-4 4-6 6-4 | Jarkko Nieminen | Match data |
| Sep 29, 2011* | Bangkok | ATP 250 | R32 | Hard | Jarkko Nieminen | 6-1 4-6 7-5 | Dominic Thiem | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dominic Thiem | #1,174 | #3 | 9,125 | 2,241 | 337 | 207 | 61.9% | 1 | 1 | 0 | 5 | 10 | 17 |
| Jarkko Nieminen | #1,029 | #13 | 1,700 | 1,917 | 357 | 334 | 51.7% | 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 | Dominic Thiem | Jarkko Nieminen | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 2011 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #638 | 1,495 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 2012 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #309 | 1,486 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #308 | 1,494 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2013 | 4–2 | 66.7% | #139 | 1,580 | 0 | 0 | 2001 | 4–1 | 80.0% | #61 | 1,608 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2014 | 22–23 | 48.9% | #39 | 1,848 | 0 | 0 | 2002 | 25–26 | 49.0% | #40 | 1,703 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2015 | 36–26 | 58.1% | #20 | 1,889 | 0 | 3 | 2003 | 37–29 | 56.1% | #36 | 1,728 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2016 | 58–24 | 70.7% | #8 | 2,015 | 0 | 7 | 2004 | 17–16 | 51.5% | #77 | 1,696 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2017 | 47–27 | 63.5% | #5 | 1,958 | 0 | 8 | 2005 | 29–22 | 56.9% | #28 | 1,797 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2018 | 50–21 | 70.4% | #8 | 2,064 | 0 | 11 | 2006 | 49–27 | 64.5% | #15 | 1,789 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 2019 | 48–17 | 73.8% | #4 | 2,145 | 0 | 16 | 2007 | 31–26 | 54.4% | #27 | 1,814 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2020 | 24–7 | 77.4% | #3 | 2,200 | 1 | 17 | 2008 | 24–26 | 48.0% | #37 | 1,758 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2021 | 8–8 | 50.0% | #15 | 2,014 | 1 | 17 | 2009 | 11–14 | 44.0% | #88 | 1,712 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2022 | 18–16 | 52.9% | #102 | 1,907 | 1 | 17 | 2010 | 28–27 | 50.9% | #39 | 1,873 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 2023 | 19–22 | 46.3% | #98 | 1,799 | 1 | 17 | 2011 | 20–25 | 44.4% | #77 | 1,830 | 0 | 1 |
| 30 | 2024 | 1–9 | 10.0% | #524 | 1,627 | 1 | 17 | 2012 | 23–26 | 46.9% | #41 | 1,744 | 0 | 2 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2013 | 27–26 | 50.9% | #39 | 1,789 | 0 | 2 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2014 | 23–25 | 47.9% | #73 | 1,767 | 0 | 2 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2015 | 9–17 | 34.6% | #153 | 1,692 | 0 | 2 |