H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 14:16 UTC
Emilio Sanchez vs Tomas Smid H2H: 1-0
Emilio Sanchez holds a 1–0 lead over Tomas Smid in their ATP head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Emilio Sanchez leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Emilio Sanchez won the 1984 Roland Garros second round 7-6 6-4 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.
ESP
Age 61
Right-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
CZE
Age 70
Right-Handed
190 cm / 6'3"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 1, 1984* | Roland Garros | Grand Slam | R64 | Clay | Emilio Sanchez | 7-6 6-4 6-4 | Tomas Smid | 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 |
| Tomas Smid | #975 | #11 | 28 | 1,998 | 497 | 318 | 61.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 10 |
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 | Tomas Smid | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 19 | 1984 | 9–12 | 42.9% | #111 | 1,545 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 1985 | 16–14 | 53.3% | #64 | 1,668 | 0 | 0 | 1976 | 5–7 | 41.7% | #154 | 1,542 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1986 | 52–23 | 69.3% | #16 | 1,841 | 0 | 3 | 1977 | 16–18 | 47.1% | #67 | 1,637 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1987 | 56–23 | 70.9% | #17 | 1,870 | 0 | 7 | 1978 | 36–25 | 59.0% | #36 | 1,799 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 1988 | 39–19 | 67.2% | #17 | 1,907 | 0 | 8 | 1979 | 50–25 | 66.7% | #27 | 1,870 | 0 | 2 |
| 24 | 1989 | 37–16 | 69.8% | #19 | 1,871 | 0 | 9 | 1980 | 45–21 | 68.2% | #23 | 1,950 | 0 | 4 |
| 25 | 1990 | 48–24 | 66.7% | #8 | 1,812 | 0 | 11 | 1981 | 54–28 | 65.9% | #28 | 1,864 | 0 | 5 |
| 26 | 1991 | 40–22 | 64.5% | #14 | 1,823 | 0 | 14 | 1982 | 62–28 | 68.9% | #24 | 1,901 | 0 | 7 |
| 27 | 1992 | 40–25 | 61.5% | #21 | 1,783 | 0 | 15 | 1983 | 59–30 | 66.3% | #17 | 1,902 | 0 | 9 |
| 28 | 1993 | 28–26 | 51.9% | #41 | 1,686 | 0 | 15 | 1984 | 46–27 | 63.0% | #16 | 1,840 | 0 | 9 |
| 29 | 1994 | 17–26 | 39.5% | #74 | 1,628 | 0 | 15 | 1985 | 47–27 | 63.5% | #19 | 1,804 | 0 | 10 |
| 30 | 1995 | 13–22 | 37.1% | #108 | 1,587 | 0 | 15 | 1986 | 28–24 | 53.8% | #54 | 1,721 | 0 | 10 |
| 31 | 1996 | 7–16 | 30.4% | #173 | 1,505 | 0 | 15 | 1987 | 30–26 | 53.6% | #31 | 1,729 | 0 | 10 |
| 32 | 1997 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #1056 | 1,467 | 0 | 15 | 1988 | 17–23 | 42.5% | #115 | 1,656 | 0 | 10 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1989 | 2–9 | 18.2% | #453 | 1,537 | 0 | 10 |