H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Jakob Hlasek vs Andres Gomez H2H: 1-2
Andres Gomez holds a 2–1 lead over Jakob Hlasek in their ATP head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on clay, while Andres Gomez leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Jakob Hlasek won the 1989 Roland Garros second round 6-4 6-2 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.
SUI
Age 61
Right-Handed
188 cm / 6'2"
H2H
1
–
2
3 main draw meetings
ECU
Age 66
Left-Handed
193 cm / 6'4"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 2, 1989* | Roland Garros | Grand Slam | R64 | Clay | Jakob Hlasek | 6-4 6-2 6-2 | Andres Gomez | Match data |
| Apr 24, 1987* | Monte Carlo | ATP 250 | R16 | Clay | Andres Gomez | 7-5 6-1 | Jakob Hlasek | Match data |
| Nov 23, 1985* | Hong Kong | ATP 250 | SF | Hard | Andres Gomez | 4-6 6-3 7-5 | Jakob Hlasek | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jakob Hlasek | #583 | #7 | 1,308 | 2,062 | 389 | 300 | 56.5% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 5 |
| Andres Gomez | #1,171 | #4 | 2,005 | 2,092 | 502 | 261 | 65.8% | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 18 | 21 |
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 | Jakob Hlasek | Andres Gomez | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 1982 | 1–2 | 33.3% | — | 1,516 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 1983 | 5–6 | 45.5% | #227 | 1,567 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 1984 | 16–19 | 45.7% | #91 | 1,647 | 0 | 0 | 1979 | 11–8 | 57.9% | #61 | 1,638 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1985 | 29–23 | 55.8% | #33 | 1,784 | 0 | 0 | 1980 | 36–23 | 61.0% | #42 | 1,800 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1986 | 35–25 | 58.3% | #32 | 1,732 | 0 | 0 | 1981 | 36–21 | 63.2% | #37 | 1,899 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 1987 | 32–21 | 60.4% | #23 | 1,856 | 0 | 0 | 1982 | 51–25 | 67.1% | #15 | 1,885 | 0 | 3 |
| 23 | 1988 | 44–14 | 75.9% | #8 | 2,050 | 0 | 2 | 1983 | 43–20 | 68.3% | #14 | 1,959 | 0 | 4 |
| 24 | 1989 | 23–18 | 56.1% | #30 | 1,795 | 0 | 3 | 1984 | 60–13 | 82.2% | #5 | 2,072 | 0 | 9 |
| 25 | 1990 | 41–22 | 65.1% | #17 | 1,937 | 0 | 4 | 1985 | 26–14 | 65.0% | #15 | 1,970 | 0 | 10 |
| 26 | 1991 | 45–25 | 64.3% | #20 | 1,869 | 0 | 5 | 1986 | 57–20 | 74.0% | #10 | 1,898 | 0 | 14 |
| 27 | 1992 | 24–22 | 52.2% | #36 | 1,806 | 0 | 5 | 1987 | 46–18 | 71.9% | #11 | 1,913 | 0 | 15 |
| 28 | 1993 | 20–25 | 44.4% | #71 | 1,713 | 0 | 5 | 1988 | 34–18 | 65.4% | #24 | 1,808 | 0 | 15 |
| 29 | 1994 | 22–24 | 47.8% | #70 | 1,676 | 0 | 5 | 1989 | 32–17 | 65.3% | #17 | 1,868 | 0 | 17 |
| 30 | 1995 | 32–27 | 54.2% | #35 | 1,783 | 0 | 5 | 1990 | 38–27 | 58.5% | #6 | 1,726 | 1 | 20 |
| 31 | 1996 | 20–27 | 42.6% | #74 | 1,751 | 0 | 5 | 1991 | 20–19 | 51.3% | #70 | 1,722 | 1 | 21 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1992 | 10–12 | 45.5% | #179 | 1,676 | 1 | 21 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1993 | 2–6 | 25.0% | #402 | 1,606 | 1 | 21 |