H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 14:16 UTC
Jakob Hlasek vs Jim Grabb H2H: 1-0
Jakob Hlasek holds a 1–0 lead over Jim Grabb in their ATP head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Jakob Hlasek leads 1–0 on carpet. Most recently, Jakob Hlasek won the 1992 Paris Masters fourth round 4-6 6-1 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
–
0
1 main draw meetings
USA
Age 62
Right-Handed
193 cm / 6'4"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 7, 1992* | Paris Masters | Masters 1000 | R16 | Carpet | Jakob Hlasek | 4-6 6-1 6-2 | Jim Grabb | 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 |
| Jim Grabb | #927 | #24 | 760 | 1,828 | 179 | 199 | 47.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
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 | Jim Grabb | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 1985 | 29–23 | 55.8% | #33 | 1,784 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 21 | 1986 | 35–25 | 58.3% | #32 | 1,732 | 0 | 0 | 1985 | 4–4 | 50.0% | #251 | 1,560 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1987 | 32–21 | 60.4% | #23 | 1,856 | 0 | 0 | 1986 | 7–6 | 53.8% | #94 | 1,636 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 1988 | 44–14 | 75.9% | #8 | 2,050 | 0 | 2 | 1987 | 20–18 | 52.6% | #66 | 1,687 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 1989 | 23–18 | 56.1% | #30 | 1,795 | 0 | 3 | 1988 | 17–23 | 42.5% | #91 | 1,562 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 1990 | 41–22 | 65.1% | #17 | 1,937 | 0 | 4 | 1989 | 27–20 | 57.4% | #35 | 1,767 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 1991 | 45–25 | 64.3% | #20 | 1,869 | 0 | 5 | 1990 | 16–18 | 47.1% | #72 | 1,687 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 1992 | 24–22 | 52.2% | #36 | 1,806 | 0 | 5 | 1991 | 19–23 | 45.2% | #87 | 1,679 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 1993 | 20–25 | 44.4% | #71 | 1,713 | 0 | 5 | 1992 | 31–24 | 56.4% | #55 | 1,747 | 0 | 2 |
| 29 | 1994 | 22–24 | 47.8% | #70 | 1,676 | 0 | 5 | 1993 | 6–9 | 40.0% | #197 | 1,690 | 0 | 2 |
| 30 | 1995 | 32–27 | 54.2% | #35 | 1,783 | 0 | 5 | 1994 | 18–20 | 47.4% | #68 | 1,669 | 0 | 2 |
| 31 | 1996 | 20–27 | 42.6% | #74 | 1,751 | 0 | 5 | 1995 | 6–17 | 26.1% | #207 | 1,544 | 0 | 2 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1996 | 6–10 | 37.5% | #199 | 1,565 | 0 | 2 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1997 | 2–7 | 22.2% | #342 | 1,516 | 0 | 2 |