H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 14:16 UTC
Fernando Luna vs Roscoe Tanner H2H: 1-0
Fernando Luna holds a 1–0 lead over Roscoe Tanner in their ATP head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Fernando Luna leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Fernando Luna won the 1984 Boston third round 6-4 4-6 6-2.
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 68
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
USA
Age 74
Left-Handed
183 cm / 6'0"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 19, 1984* | Boston | ATP 250 | R32 | Clay | Fernando Luna | 6-4 4-6 6-2 | Roscoe Tanner | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fernando Luna | #723 | #33 | 310 | 1,777 | 167 | 160 | 51.1% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Roscoe Tanner | #789 | #4 | 0 | 2,158 | 595 | 298 | 66.6% | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 15 | 17 |
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 | Fernando Luna | Roscoe Tanner | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1969 | 0–2 | 0.0% | — | 1,479 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1970 | 0–9 | 0.0% | — | 1,417 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1977 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #250 | 1,511 | 0 | 0 | 1971 | 16–10 | 61.5% | — | 1,703 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1978 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #340 | 1,540 | 0 | 0 | 1972 | 29–14 | 67.4% | — | 1,911 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1979 | 5–9 | 35.7% | #87 | 1,515 | 0 | 0 | 1973 | 45–30 | 60.0% | #24 | 1,812 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1980 | 18–13 | 58.1% | #66 | 1,707 | 0 | 0 | 1974 | 66–28 | 70.2% | #14 | 1,959 | 0 | 2 |
| 23 | 1981 | 17–15 | 53.1% | #81 | 1,695 | 0 | 0 | 1975 | 65–24 | 73.0% | #9 | 1,965 | 0 | 5 |
| 24 | 1982 | 23–18 | 56.1% | #60 | 1,728 | 0 | 0 | 1976 | 70–28 | 71.4% | #11 | 2,012 | 0 | 9 |
| 25 | 1983 | 19–13 | 59.4% | #53 | 1,729 | 0 | 0 | 1977 | 52–30 | 63.4% | #15 | 1,880 | 1 | 11 |
| 26 | 1984 | 12–14 | 46.2% | #70 | 1,644 | 0 | 0 | 1978 | 59–24 | 71.1% | #11 | 1,935 | 1 | 13 |
| 27 | 1985 | 10–14 | 41.7% | #111 | 1,618 | 0 | 0 | 1979 | 61–19 | 76.2% | #5 | 2,025 | 1 | 15 |
| 28 | 1986 | 19–14 | 57.6% | #52 | 1,690 | 0 | 0 | 1980 | 42–16 | 72.4% | #13 | 1,993 | 1 | 16 |
| 29 | 1987 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #261 | 1,643 | 0 | 0 | 1981 | 51–22 | 69.9% | #12 | 1,901 | 1 | 17 |
| 30 | 1988 | 18–12 | 60.0% | #59 | 1,705 | 0 | 0 | 1982 | 20–17 | 54.1% | #43 | 1,779 | 1 | 17 |
| 31 | 1989 | 11–16 | 40.7% | #135 | 1,565 | 0 | 0 | 1983 | 16–13 | 55.2% | #36 | 1,872 | 1 | 17 |
| 32 | 1990 | 8–10 | 44.4% | #110 | 1,588 | 0 | 0 | 1984 | 3–11 | 21.4% | #249 | 1,679 | 1 | 17 |
| 33 | 1991 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #356 | 1,535 | 0 | 0 | 1985 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #794 | 1,661 | 1 | 17 |