H2H data updated: 2026-07-17 14:15 UTC
Emilio Sanchez vs Amos Mansdorf H2H: 2-2
Emilio Sanchez and Amos Mansdorf are tied 2–2 in their ATP head-to-head. Across 4 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on carpet, while Emilio Sanchez leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Amos Mansdorf won the 1994 US Open first round 6-4 6-4 3-6 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.
ESP
Age 61
Right-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H
2
–
2
4 main draw meetings
ISR
Age 60
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 31, 1994* | US Open | Grand Slam | R128 | Hard | Amos Mansdorf | 6-4 6-4 3-6 6-3 | Emilio Sanchez | Match data |
| Jul 9, 1992* | Gstaad | ATP 250 | R32 | Clay | Emilio Sanchez | 6-7(3) 6-3 6-4 | Amos Mansdorf | Match data |
| Feb 21, 1991* | Stuttgart Indoor | ATP 250 | R32 | Carpet | Emilio Sanchez | 7-6 6-3 | Amos Mansdorf | Match data |
| Mar 20, 1987* | Rotterdam | ATP 250 | R16 | Carpet | Amos Mansdorf | 7-5 6-2 | Emilio Sanchez | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Emilio Sanchez | #1,301 | #7 | 1,634 | 2,038 | 402 | 272 | 59.6% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 14 | 15 |
| Amos Mansdorf | #514 | #18 | 1,184 | 1,897 | 288 | 214 | 57.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 6 |
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 | Emilio Sanchez | Amos Mansdorf | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1981 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,489 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1983 | 1–1 | 50.0% | — | 1,499 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1984 | 3–2 | 60.0% | #270 | 1,531 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1984 | 9–12 | 42.9% | #111 | 1,545 | 0 | 0 | 1985 | 15–13 | 53.6% | #84 | 1,672 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1985 | 16–14 | 53.3% | #64 | 1,668 | 0 | 0 | 1986 | 19–17 | 52.8% | #37 | 1,799 | 0 | 1 |
| 21 | 1986 | 52–23 | 69.3% | #16 | 1,841 | 0 | 3 | 1987 | 35–21 | 62.5% | #27 | 1,806 | 0 | 2 |
| 22 | 1987 | 56–23 | 70.9% | #17 | 1,870 | 0 | 7 | 1988 | 31–16 | 66.0% | #26 | 1,853 | 0 | 4 |
| 23 | 1988 | 39–19 | 67.2% | #17 | 1,907 | 0 | 8 | 1989 | 29–19 | 60.4% | #39 | 1,740 | 0 | 4 |
| 24 | 1989 | 37–16 | 69.8% | #19 | 1,871 | 0 | 9 | 1990 | 39–23 | 62.9% | #33 | 1,827 | 0 | 5 |
| 25 | 1990 | 48–24 | 66.7% | #8 | 1,812 | 0 | 11 | 1991 | 21–25 | 45.7% | #62 | 1,738 | 0 | 5 |
| 26 | 1991 | 40–22 | 64.5% | #14 | 1,823 | 0 | 14 | 1992 | 35–27 | 56.5% | #25 | 1,771 | 0 | 5 |
| 27 | 1992 | 40–25 | 61.5% | #21 | 1,783 | 0 | 15 | 1993 | 40–24 | 62.5% | #25 | 1,787 | 0 | 6 |
| 28 | 1993 | 28–26 | 51.9% | #41 | 1,686 | 0 | 15 | 1994 | 20–25 | 44.4% | #69 | 1,692 | 0 | 6 |
| 29 | 1994 | 17–26 | 39.5% | #74 | 1,628 | 0 | 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 1995 | 13–22 | 37.1% | #108 | 1,587 | 0 | 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 1996 | 7–16 | 30.4% | #173 | 1,505 | 0 | 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 1997 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #1056 | 1,467 | 0 | 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |