H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 08:25 UTC
Gastao Elias vs Pablo Andujar H2H: 1-0
Gastao Elias holds a 1–0 lead over Pablo Andujar in their ATP head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Gastao Elias leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Gastao Elias won the 2016 Sao Paulo third round 1-6 6-4 0-0 RET.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
Portugal
Age 35
Right-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
ESP
Age 40
Right-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 25, 2016* | Sao Paulo | ATP 250 | R32 | Clay | Gastao Elias | 1-6 6-4 0-0 (ret.) | Pablo Andujar | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gastao Elias | #499 | #57 | 831 | 1,732 | 24 | 45 | 34.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Pablo Andujar | #1,102 | #32 | 1,205 | 1,862 | 164 | 240 | 40.6% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 4 |
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 | Gastao Elias | Pablo Andujar | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 15 | 2006 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #936 | 1,493 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 2008 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #578 | 1,416 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 2011 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #172 | 1,454 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 21 | 2012 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #139 | 1,365 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #146 | 1,623 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2013 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #175 | 1,519 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 3–6 | 33.3% | #101 | 1,596 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2014 | 3–6 | 33.3% | #132 | 1,658 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 1–12 | 7.7% | #160 | 1,524 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2015 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #133 | 1,541 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 8–8 | 50.0% | #71 | 1,703 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2016 | 11–12 | 47.8% | #81 | 1,673 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 25–28 | 47.2% | #46 | 1,681 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2017 | 5–11 | 31.2% | #115 | 1,644 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 19–29 | 39.6% | #42 | 1,647 | 0 | 2 |
| 27 | 2018 | 2–6 | 25.0% | #263 | 1,549 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 18–31 | 36.7% | #48 | 1,722 | 0 | 2 |
| 28 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2014 | 23–22 | 51.1% | #41 | 1,831 | 0 | 3 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2015 | 16–22 | 42.1% | #64 | 1,788 | 0 | 3 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2016 | 1–7 | 12.5% | #432 | 1,639 | 0 | 3 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2018 | 7–7 | 50.0% | #82 | 1,659 | 0 | 4 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2019 | 15–18 | 45.5% | #64 | 1,728 | 0 | 4 |
| 34 | 2025 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #371 | 1,541 | 0 | 0 | 2020 | 4–12 | 25.0% | #60 | 1,630 | 0 | 4 |
| 35 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2021 | 12–17 | 41.4% | #91 | 1,737 | 0 | 4 |
| 36 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2022 | 9–13 | 40.9% | #121 | 1,620 | 0 | 4 |
| 37 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2023 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #1102 | 1,518 | 0 | 4 |