H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC

Greg Rusedski vs Thomas Enqvist H2H: 6-2

Greg Rusedski holds a 6–2 lead over Thomas Enqvist in their ATP head-to-head. Across 8 main-draw meetings, Greg Rusedski leads 4–0 on carpet, while they are tied 2–2 on hard courts. Most recently, Greg Rusedski won the 2004 Cincinnati Masters second round 3-6 6-3 6-2.

GBR Age 52 Left-Handed 193 cm / 6'4"
H2H
6 2
8 main draw meetings
SWE Age 52 Right-Handed 190 cm / 6'3"

H2H Match Log

DateTournamentCategoryRoundSurfaceWinnerScoreLoserMatch
Aug 4, 2004* Cincinnati Masters Masters 1000 R64 Hard Greg Rusedski #96 3-6 6-3 6-2 Thomas Enqvist #54 Match data
Feb 27, 1999* London ATP 250 QF Carpet Greg Rusedski #10 7-5 4-6 6-3 Thomas Enqvist #13 Match data
Mar 21, 1998* Miami Masters Masters 1000 R16 Hard Thomas Enqvist #24 6-2 6-2 Greg Rusedski #5 Match data
Mar 15, 1998* Indian Wells Masters Masters 1000 QF Hard Greg Rusedski #6 2-6 7-6(1) 6-4 Thomas Enqvist #25 Match data
Oct 4, 1997* Basel ATP 250 QF Carpet Greg Rusedski #10 7-6(4) 4-6 6-3 Thomas Enqvist #15 Match data
Feb 1, 1997* Zagreb ATP 250 SF Carpet Greg Rusedski #56 6-4 6-4 Thomas Enqvist #10 Match data
Apr 19, 1996* Tokyo ATP 250 R16 Hard Thomas Enqvist #8 7-6(4) 6-1 Greg Rusedski #47 Match data
Oct 12, 1994* Tokyo Indoor ATP 250 R64 Carpet Greg Rusedski #57 7-6(10) 4-6 7-6(5) Thomas Enqvist #56 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
Greg Rusedski #944 #4 3,094 2,049 415 276 60.1% 0 1 1 0 13 15
Thomas Enqvist #548 #4 2,693 2,013 422 281 60.0% 0 3 0 0 16 19

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 Greg Rusedski Thomas Enqvist
YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles
15 1989 0–1 0.0% #1103 1,484 0 0
16 1990 0–1 0.0% #472 1,480 0 0
17 1991 1–5 16.7% #231 1,467 0 0
18 1992 2–2 50.0% #161 1,525 0 0 1992 16–9 64.0% #63 1,734 0 1
19 1993 16–9 64.0% #50 1,750 0 1 1993 18–23 43.9% #88 1,712 0 2
20 1994 21–29 42.0% #114 1,681 0 1 1994 23–19 54.8% #59 1,761 0 2
21 1995 34–25 57.6% #37 1,699 0 2 1995 63–22 74.1% #7 1,982 0 7
22 1996 36–25 59.0% #48 1,805 0 3 1996 49–25 66.2% #9 1,980 0 10
23 1997 53–23 69.7% #6 1,950 0 5 1997 35–21 62.5% #28 1,873 0 11
24 1998 50–22 69.4% #9 2,011 0 7 1998 35–15 70.0% #22 1,869 0 13
25 1999 46–22 67.6% #14 1,976 0 9 1999 45–25 64.3% #4 1,913 0 16
26 2000 19–19 50.0% #69 1,802 0 9 2000 51–23 68.9% #9 1,906 0 18
27 2001 37–24 60.7% #31 1,807 0 10 2001 31–21 59.6% #24 1,848 0 18
28 2002 33–16 67.3% #31 1,904 0 12 2002 23–17 57.5% #44 1,792 0 19
29 2003 11–8 57.9% #119 1,825 0 13 2003 13–23 36.1% #96 1,710 0 19
30 2004 24–15 61.5% #46 1,819 0 14 2004 12–19 38.7% #72 1,627 0 19
31 2005 27–22 55.1% #37 1,780 0 15 2005 7–12 36.8% #133 1,589 0 19
32 2006 6–15 28.6% #191 1,638 0 15