H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Jakob Hlasek vs Thomas Hogstedt H2H: 3-1
Jakob Hlasek holds a 3–1 lead over Thomas Hogstedt in their ATP head-to-head. Across 4 main-draw meetings, Jakob Hlasek leads 3–0 on carpet, while Thomas Hogstedt leads 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Thomas Hogstedt won the 1989 Wimbledon first round 6-3 7-6 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.
SUI
Age 61
Right-Handed
188 cm / 6'2"
H2H
3
–
1
4 main draw meetings
SWE
Age 62
Right-Handed
190 cm / 6'3"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 28, 1989* | Wimbledon | Grand Slam | R128 | Grass | Thomas Hogstedt | 6-3 7-6 6-1 | Jakob Hlasek | Match data |
| Mar 20, 1986* | Brussels | ATP 250 | R32 | Carpet | Jakob Hlasek | 6-1 1-6 6-3 | Thomas Hogstedt | Match data |
| Mar 13, 1986* | Milan | ATP 250 | R32 | Carpet | Jakob Hlasek | 6-4 6-2 | Thomas Hogstedt | Match data |
| Mar 28, 1985* | Milan | ATP 250 | R32 | Carpet | Jakob Hlasek | 6-2 7-6 | Thomas Hogstedt | 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 |
| Thomas Hogstedt | #1,032 | #38 | 413 | 1,736 | 90 | 153 | 37.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
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 | Thomas Hogstedt | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1979 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #368 | 1,521 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 1982 | 1–2 | 33.3% | — | 1,516 | 0 | 0 | 1981 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #549 | 1,538 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 1983 | 5–6 | 45.5% | #227 | 1,567 | 0 | 0 | 1982 | 9–10 | 47.4% | #82 | 1,588 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1984 | 16–19 | 45.7% | #91 | 1,647 | 0 | 0 | 1983 | 15–16 | 48.4% | #63 | 1,690 | 0 | 1 |
| 20 | 1985 | 29–23 | 55.8% | #33 | 1,784 | 0 | 0 | 1984 | 10–16 | 38.5% | #84 | 1,639 | 0 | 1 |
| 21 | 1986 | 35–25 | 58.3% | #32 | 1,732 | 0 | 0 | 1985 | 3–10 | 23.1% | #210 | 1,520 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 1987 | 32–21 | 60.4% | #23 | 1,856 | 0 | 0 | 1986 | 2–8 | 20.0% | #124 | 1,504 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 1988 | 44–14 | 75.9% | #8 | 2,050 | 0 | 2 | 1987 | 8–15 | 34.8% | #179 | 1,508 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 1989 | 23–18 | 56.1% | #30 | 1,795 | 0 | 3 | 1988 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #159 | 1,521 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 1990 | 41–22 | 65.1% | #17 | 1,937 | 0 | 4 | 1989 | 8–10 | 44.4% | #133 | 1,613 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 1991 | 45–25 | 64.3% | #20 | 1,869 | 0 | 5 | 1990 | 12–26 | 31.6% | #91 | 1,509 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 1992 | 24–22 | 52.2% | #36 | 1,806 | 0 | 5 | 1991 | 11–23 | 32.4% | #130 | 1,518 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 1993 | 20–25 | 44.4% | #71 | 1,713 | 0 | 5 | 1992 | 5–8 | 38.5% | #181 | 1,547 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 1994 | 22–24 | 47.8% | #70 | 1,676 | 0 | 5 | 1993 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #306 | 1,530 | 0 | 1 |
| 30 | 1995 | 32–27 | 54.2% | #35 | 1,783 | 0 | 5 | 1994 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #309 | 1,546 | 0 | 1 |
| 31 | 1996 | 20–27 | 42.6% | #74 | 1,751 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |