H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 01:16 UTC
Gael Monfils vs Richard Gasquet H2H: 11-7
Gael Monfils holds a 11–7 lead over Richard Gasquet in their ATP head-to-head. Across 18 main-draw meetings, Gael Monfils leads 7–6 on hard courts and 2–1 on grass. Most recently, Gael Monfils won the 2020 Dubai quarterfinal 6-3 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.
France
Age 39
Right-Handed
193 cm / 6'4"
H2H
11
–
7
18 main draw meetings
France
Age 40
Right-Handed
183 cm / 6'0"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 28, 2020* | Dubai | ATP 500 | QF | Hard | Gael Monfils | 6-3 6-3 | Richard Gasquet | Match data |
| Jul 4, 2018* | Wimbledon | Grand Slam | R128 | Grass | Gael Monfils | 7-6(6) 7-5 6-4 | Richard Gasquet | Match data |
| Jul 1, 2017* | Eastbourne | ATP 250 | SF | Grass | Gael Monfils | 6-2 6-7(7) 7-6(4) | Richard Gasquet | Match data |
| Jun 22, 2017* | Halle | ATP 500 | R32 | Grass | Richard Gasquet | 3-6 6-4 6-3 | Gael Monfils | Match data |
| Jun 3, 2017* | Roland Garros | Grand Slam | R32 | Clay | Gael Monfils | 7-6(5) 5-7 4-3 (ret.) | Richard Gasquet | Match data |
| Feb 25, 2017* | Marseille | ATP 250 | QF | Hard | Richard Gasquet | 6-7(5) 6-4 6-2 | Gael Monfils | Match data |
| Feb 7, 2015* | Montpellier | ATP 250 | SF | Hard | Richard Gasquet | 6-4 6-3 | Gael Monfils | Match data |
| Aug 31, 2014* | US Open | Grand Slam | R32 | Hard | Gael Monfils | 6-4 6-2 6-2 | Richard Gasquet | Match data |
| Feb 9, 2014* | Montpellier | ATP 250 | F | Hard | Gael Monfils | 6-4 6-4 | Richard Gasquet | Match data |
| Jan 2, 2014* | Doha | ATP 250 | R16 | Hard | Gael Monfils | 6-2 7-5 | Richard Gasquet | Match data |
| Feb 8, 2013* | Montpellier | ATP 250 | R16 | Hard | Richard Gasquet | 6-3 2-6 6-3 | Gael Monfils | Match data |
| Apr 22, 2011* | Barcelona | ATP 500 | R16 | Clay | Gael Monfils | 6-4 7-6(7) | Richard Gasquet | Match data |
| Oct 13, 2010* | Shanghai Masters | Masters 1000 | R32 | Hard | Richard Gasquet | 6-4 3-6 6-4 | Gael Monfils | Match data |
| Sep 7, 2010* | US Open | Grand Slam | R16 | Hard | Gael Monfils | 6-4 7-5 7-5 | Richard Gasquet | Match data |
| Sep 26, 2009* | Metz | ATP 250 | SF | Hard | Gael Monfils | 6-4 6-3 | Richard Gasquet | Match data |
| Jan 21, 2007* | Australian Open | Grand Slam | R32 | Hard | Richard Gasquet | 6-0 4-6 7-5 6-3 | Gael Monfils | Match data |
| Oct 8, 2005* | Metz | ATP 250 | QF | Hard | Gael Monfils | 7-6(3) 6-3 | Richard Gasquet | Match data |
| Oct 16, 2004* | Metz | ATP 250 | QF | Hard | Richard Gasquet | 7-5 6-1 | Gael Monfils | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gael Monfils | #325 | #6 | 3,815 | 2,151 | 569 | 356 | 61.5% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 10 | 13 |
| Richard Gasquet | #448 | #7 | 3,365 | 2,165 | 596 | 406 | 59.5% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 16 | 16 |
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 | Gael Monfils | Richard Gasquet | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2002 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #161 | 1,486 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 2004 | 3–2 | 60.0% | #239 | 1,541 | 0 | 0 | 2003 | 2–8 | 20.0% | #93 | 1,463 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2005 | 25–22 | 53.2% | #30 | 1,753 | 0 | 1 | 2004 | 13–15 | 46.4% | #107 | 1,597 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2006 | 20–19 | 51.3% | #46 | 1,721 | 0 | 1 | 2005 | 30–10 | 75.0% | #16 | 1,851 | 0 | 1 |
| 20 | 2007 | 21–21 | 50.0% | #38 | 1,781 | 0 | 1 | 2006 | 33–20 | 62.3% | #18 | 1,922 | 0 | 4 |
| 21 | 2008 | 27–16 | 62.8% | #14 | 1,933 | 0 | 1 | 2007 | 47–24 | 66.2% | #8 | 1,920 | 0 | 5 |
| 22 | 2009 | 42–19 | 68.9% | #13 | 1,994 | 0 | 2 | 2008 | 31–21 | 59.6% | #25 | 1,869 | 0 | 5 |
| 23 | 2010 | 42–19 | 68.9% | #12 | 2,062 | 0 | 3 | 2009 | 23–15 | 60.5% | #52 | 1,855 | 0 | 5 |
| 24 | 2011 | 37–17 | 68.5% | #16 | 1,996 | 0 | 4 | 2010 | 38–24 | 61.3% | #30 | 1,892 | 0 | 6 |
| 25 | 2012 | 18–10 | 64.3% | #77 | 1,936 | 0 | 4 | 2011 | 34–18 | 65.4% | #19 | 1,984 | 0 | 6 |
| 26 | 2013 | 33–22 | 60.0% | #31 | 1,929 | 0 | 4 | 2012 | 41–21 | 66.1% | #10 | 2,002 | 0 | 7 |
| 27 | 2014 | 32–15 | 68.1% | #18 | 2,054 | 0 | 5 | 2013 | 48–23 | 67.6% | #9 | 2,046 | 0 | 10 |
| 28 | 2015 | 33–18 | 64.7% | #24 | 1,951 | 0 | 5 | 2014 | 29–19 | 60.4% | #26 | 1,935 | 0 | 10 |
| 29 | 2016 | 40–17 | 70.2% | #7 | 2,052 | 0 | 6 | 2015 | 43–17 | 71.7% | #9 | 2,127 | 0 | 12 |
| 30 | 2017 | 20–14 | 58.8% | #46 | 1,966 | 0 | 6 | 2016 | 33–17 | 66.0% | #18 | 1,998 | 0 | 14 |
| 31 | 2018 | 30–20 | 60.0% | #29 | 1,921 | 0 | 7 | 2017 | 28–18 | 60.9% | #31 | 1,956 | 0 | 14 |
| 32 | 2019 | 37–20 | 64.9% | #10 | 1,920 | 0 | 8 | 2018 | 34–23 | 59.6% | #26 | 1,933 | 0 | 15 |
| 33 | 2020 | 15–6 | 71.4% | #11 | 1,934 | 0 | 10 | 2019 | 17–18 | 48.6% | #61 | 1,844 | 0 | 15 |
| 34 | 2021 | 19–16 | 54.3% | #21 | 1,910 | 0 | 10 | 2020 | 10–10 | 50.0% | #47 | 1,823 | 0 | 15 |
| 35 | 2022 | 14–7 | 66.7% | #52 | 1,934 | 0 | 11 | 2021 | 14–17 | 45.2% | #87 | 1,772 | 0 | 15 |
| 36 | 2023 | 15–12 | 55.6% | #74 | 1,925 | 0 | 12 | 2022 | 24–19 | 55.8% | #68 | 1,860 | 0 | 15 |
| 37 | 2024 | 25–21 | 54.3% | #55 | 1,895 | 0 | 12 | 2023 | 15–25 | 37.5% | #76 | 1,628 | 0 | 16 |
| 38 | 2025 | 18–16 | 52.9% | #68 | 1,771 | 0 | 13 | 2024 | 4–14 | 22.2% | #129 | 1,620 | 0 | 16 |
| 39 | 2026 | 3–7 | 30.0% | #325 | 1,685 | 0 | 13 | 2025 | 4–5 | 44.4% | #313 | 1,636 | 0 | 16 |