H2H data updated: 2026-07-17 14:15 UTC
Jan Kodes vs Rod Laver H2H: 2-5
Rod Laver holds a 5–2 lead over Jan Kodes in their ATP head-to-head. Across 7 main-draw meetings, Rod Laver leads 3–1 on carpet and 2–0 on clay. Most recently, Rod Laver won the 1978 Richmond Wct third round 6-1 6-3.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
CZE
Age 80
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H
2
–
5
7 main draw meetings
AUS
Age 87
Left-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 2, 1978* | Richmond Wct | ATP 250 | R32 | Carpet | Rod Laver | 6-1 6-3 | Jan Kodes | Match data |
| Aug 22, 1975* | Boston | ATP 250 | R16 | Clay | Rod Laver | 6-1 6-0 | Jan Kodes | Match data |
| Apr 27, 1974* | Denver Wct | ATP 250 | QF | Carpet | Jan Kodes | 6-2 6-4 | Rod Laver | Match data |
| Jan 26, 1974* | Philadelphia Wct | ATP 250 | SF | Carpet | Rod Laver | 6-4 1-6 6-4 6-0 | Jan Kodes | Match data |
| Nov 6, 1971* | Stockholm Open | ATP 250 | QF | Hard | Jan Kodes | 4-6 6-4 7-6 | Rod Laver | Match data |
| May 10, 1971* | Rome | Masters 1000 | F | Clay | Rod Laver | 7-5 6-3 6-3 | Jan Kodes | Match data |
| Dec 9, 1970 | Masters | ATP Finals | RR | Carpet | Rod Laver | 6-4 6-3 | Jan Kodes | Match data |
* Estimated match date where the exact historical date is unavailable.
Career Comparison
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 | Jan Kodes | Rod Laver | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 22 | 1968 | 23–18 | 56.1% | — | 1,590 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 23 | 1969 | 32–19 | 62.7% | — | 1,730 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 24 | 1970 | 58–31 | 65.2% | — | 1,817 | 1 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 25 | 1971 | 49–23 | 68.1% | — | 1,967 | 2 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 26 | 1972 | 44–15 | 74.6% | — | 1,937 | 2 | 6 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 27 | 1973 | 51–20 | 71.8% | #9 | 1,934 | 3 | 8 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 1974 | 43–22 | 66.2% | #17 | 1,936 | 3 | 8 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 1975 | 51–20 | 71.8% | #19 | 1,982 | 3 | 9 | 1968 | 73–19 | 79.3% | — | 1,881 | 1 | 13 |
| 30 | 1976 | 49–21 | 70.0% | #19 | 1,983 | 3 | 10 | 1969 | 97–14 | 87.4% | — | 2,161 | 5 | 29 |
| 31 | 1977 | 30–25 | 54.5% | #40 | 1,851 | 3 | 10 | 1970 | 89–15 | 85.6% | — | 2,213 | 5 | 42 |
| 32 | 1978 | 13–18 | 41.9% | #119 | 1,754 | 3 | 10 | 1971 | 85–20 | 81.0% | — | 2,155 | 5 | 49 |
| 33 | 1979 | 16–16 | 50.0% | #88 | 1,701 | 3 | 10 | 1972 | 50–16 | 75.8% | — | 2,016 | 5 | 54 |
| 34 | 1980 | 5–13 | 27.8% | #221 | 1,581 | 3 | 10 | 1973 | 67–16 | 80.7% | #8 | 2,088 | 5 | 61 |
| 35 | 1981 | 1–7 | 12.5% | #221 | 1,509 | 3 | 10 | 1974 | 45–10 | 81.8% | #4 | 2,115 | 5 | 67 |
| 36 | 1982 | 0–5 | 0.0% | — | 1,464 | 3 | 10 | 1975 | 52–13 | 80.0% | #10 | 2,087 | 5 | 72 |
| 37 | 1983 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #504 | 1,447 | 3 | 10 | 1976 | 9–11 | 45.0% | #73 | 1,995 | 5 | 72 |
| 38 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1977 | 5–9 | 35.7% | #124 | 1,927 | 5 | 72 |
| 39 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1978 | 4–3 | 57.1% | #216 | 1,917 | 5 | 72 |
| 40 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1979 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #662 | 1,901 | 5 | 72 |