H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Guillermo Vilas vs Lawson Duncan H2H: 0-3
Lawson Duncan holds a 3–0 lead over Guillermo Vilas in their ATP head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Lawson Duncan leads 3–0 on clay. Most recently, Lawson Duncan won the 1989 Charleston fourth round 3-6 6-2 6-1.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
ARG
Age 73
Left-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H
0
–
3
3 main draw meetings
USA
Age 61
Right-Handed
185 cm / 6'1"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 12, 1989* | Charleston | ATP 250 | R16 | Clay | Lawson Duncan | 3-6 6-2 6-1 | Guillermo Vilas | Match data |
| Jul 28, 1988* | Bordeaux | ATP 250 | R32 | Clay | Lawson Duncan | 6-7 6-2 6-3 | Guillermo Vilas | Match data |
| Aug 6, 1986* | Kitzbuhel | ATP 250 | R64 | Clay | Lawson Duncan | 6-2 6-2 | Guillermo Vilas | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Guillermo Vilas | #1,186 | #2 | 47 | 2,338 | 898 | 282 | 76.1% | 4 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 55 | 63 |
| Lawson Duncan | #1,094 | #47 | 317 | 1,761 | 105 | 110 | 48.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
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 | Guillermo Vilas | Lawson Duncan | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 15 | 1968 | 1–1 | 50.0% | — | 1,507 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 16 | 1969 | 3–3 | 50.0% | — | 1,549 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 1970 | 2–4 | 33.3% | — | 1,533 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 1971 | 1–1 | 50.0% | — | 1,538 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 1972 | 18–15 | 54.5% | — | 1,693 | 0 | 0 | 1984 | 4–5 | 44.4% | #165 | 1,537 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1973 | 24–14 | 63.2% | #31 | 1,851 | 0 | 1 | 1985 | 26–19 | 57.8% | #59 | 1,624 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1974 | 88–22 | 80.0% | #5 | 2,171 | 0 | 8 | 1986 | 11–18 | 37.9% | #174 | 1,569 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1975 | 87–18 | 82.9% | #2 | 2,129 | 0 | 13 | 1987 | 6–9 | 40.0% | #93 | 1,565 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 1976 | 82–20 | 80.4% | #6 | 2,079 | 0 | 19 | 1988 | 21–17 | 55.3% | #58 | 1,657 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 1977 | 128–15 | 89.5% | #2 | 2,303 | 2 | 35 | 1989 | 25–22 | 53.2% | #91 | 1,672 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 1978 | 61–8 | 88.4% | #3 | 2,216 | 3 | 42 | 1990 | 12–18 | 40.0% | #143 | 1,589 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 1979 | 70–21 | 76.9% | #6 | 2,087 | 4 | 46 | 1991 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #432 | 1,564 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 1980 | 67–17 | 79.8% | #4 | 2,050 | 4 | 50 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 1981 | 64–16 | 80.0% | #6 | 2,035 | 4 | 53 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 1982 | 70–16 | 81.4% | #4 | 2,014 | 4 | 60 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 1983 | 51–17 | 75.0% | #11 | 1,947 | 4 | 63 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 1984 | 17–14 | 54.8% | #28 | 1,791 | 4 | 63 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 1985 | 17–14 | 54.8% | #39 | 1,767 | 4 | 63 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 1986 | 18–12 | 60.0% | #22 | 1,760 | 4 | 63 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 34 | 1987 | 16–13 | 55.2% | #71 | 1,717 | 4 | 63 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 35 | 1988 | 11–15 | 42.3% | #126 | 1,630 | 4 | 63 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 36 | 1989 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #408 | 1,601 | 4 | 63 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 39 | 1992 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #463 | 1,577 | 4 | 63 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |