H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 19:16 UTC
Dominik Hrbaty vs Cedric Pioline H2H: 0-2
Cedric Pioline holds a 2–0 lead over Dominik Hrbaty in their ATP head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Cedric Pioline leads 2–0 on clay. Most recently, Cedric Pioline won the 2002 Barcelona fourth round 6-3 7-6(7).
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
SVK
Age 48
Right-Handed
183 cm / 6'0"
H2H
0
–
2
2 main draw meetings
FRA
Age 57
Right-Handed
188 cm / 6'2"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 26, 2002* | Barcelona | ATP 250 | R16 | Clay | Cedric Pioline | 6-3 7-6(7) | Dominik Hrbaty | Match data |
| Apr 24, 2000* | Monte Carlo Masters | Masters 1000 | F | Clay | Cedric Pioline | 6-4 7-6(3) 7-6(6) | Dominik Hrbaty | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dominik Hrbaty | #1,508 | #12 | 1,830 | 1,948 | 326 | 296 | 52.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 6 |
| Cedric Pioline | #750 | #5 | 2,335 | 1,983 | 370 | 301 | 55.1% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 5 |
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 | Dominik Hrbaty | Cedric Pioline | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 18 | 1996 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #78 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 1997 | 24–23 | 51.1% | #40 | 1,715 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 1998 | 30–26 | 53.6% | #46 | 1,689 | 0 | 1 | 1989 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #202 | 1,483 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1999 | 37–27 | 57.8% | #21 | 1,700 | 0 | 2 | 1990 | 5–12 | 29.4% | #118 | 1,484 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2000 | 38–27 | 58.5% | #17 | 1,843 | 0 | 2 | 1991 | 21–20 | 51.2% | #51 | 1,664 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2001 | 28–29 | 49.1% | #36 | 1,678 | 0 | 3 | 1992 | 31–27 | 53.4% | #33 | 1,845 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2002 | 22–28 | 44.0% | #51 | 1,670 | 0 | 3 | 1993 | 51–27 | 65.4% | #10 | 1,936 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2003 | 25–26 | 49.0% | #61 | 1,670 | 0 | 3 | 1994 | 29–28 | 50.9% | #51 | 1,767 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2004 | 40–24 | 62.5% | #14 | 1,742 | 0 | 6 | 1995 | 24–27 | 47.1% | #54 | 1,760 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2005 | 37–25 | 59.7% | #18 | 1,823 | 0 | 6 | 1996 | 38–21 | 64.4% | #21 | 1,805 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2006 | 31–26 | 54.4% | #21 | 1,803 | 0 | 6 | 1997 | 37–25 | 59.7% | #20 | 1,834 | 0 | 2 |
| 29 | 2007 | 9–21 | 30.0% | #136 | 1,594 | 0 | 6 | 1998 | 38–26 | 59.4% | #18 | 1,764 | 0 | 2 |
| 30 | 2008 | 3–7 | 30.0% | #253 | 1,563 | 0 | 6 | 1999 | 37–28 | 56.9% | #13 | 1,795 | 0 | 3 |
| 31 | 2009 | 2–5 | 28.6% | #141 | 1,649 | 0 | 6 | 2000 | 32–19 | 62.7% | #16 | 1,760 | 0 | 5 |
| 32 | 2010 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #417 | 1,589 | 0 | 6 | 2001 | 17–22 | 43.6% | #84 | 1,657 | 0 | 5 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2002 | 10–16 | 38.5% | #119 | 1,618 | 0 | 5 |