H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Jan-Michael Gambill vs Cedric Pioline H2H: 2-1
Jan-Michael Gambill holds a 2–1 lead over Cedric Pioline in their ATP head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Jan-Michael Gambill leads 2–0 on hard courts, while Cedric Pioline leads 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Jan-Michael Gambill won the 2001 US Open first round 6-2 6-2 6-4.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
USA
Age 49
Right-Handed
190 cm / 6'3"
H2H
2
–
1
3 main draw meetings
FRA
Age 57
Right-Handed
188 cm / 6'2"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 29, 2001* | US Open | Grand Slam | R128 | Hard | Jan-Michael Gambill | 6-2 6-2 6-4 | Cedric Pioline | Match data |
| Jun 15, 2000* | Queen's Club | ATP 250 | R32 | Grass | Cedric Pioline | 5-7 6-2 6-3 | Jan-Michael Gambill | Match data |
| Aug 13, 1998* | Cincinnati Masters | Masters 1000 | R32 | Hard | Jan-Michael Gambill | 6-7(5) 7-6(5) 6-4 | Cedric Pioline | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan-Michael Gambill | #1,352 | #14 | 1,655 | 1,956 | 201 | 191 | 51.3% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
| Cedric Pioline | #750 | #5 | 2,335 | 1,983 | 370 | 301 | 55.1% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 5 |
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-Michael Gambill | Cedric Pioline | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 18 | 1995 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #555 | 1,487 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 1997 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #186 | 1,520 | 0 | 0 | 1989 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #202 | 1,483 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1998 | 31–23 | 57.4% | #38 | 1,764 | 0 | 0 | 1990 | 5–12 | 29.4% | #118 | 1,484 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1999 | 25–25 | 50.0% | #58 | 1,764 | 0 | 1 | 1991 | 21–20 | 51.2% | #51 | 1,664 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2000 | 33–26 | 55.9% | #33 | 1,804 | 0 | 1 | 1992 | 31–27 | 53.4% | #33 | 1,845 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2001 | 35–22 | 61.4% | #21 | 1,745 | 0 | 2 | 1993 | 51–27 | 65.4% | #10 | 1,936 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2002 | 28–26 | 51.9% | #42 | 1,755 | 0 | 2 | 1994 | 29–28 | 50.9% | #51 | 1,767 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2003 | 22–25 | 46.8% | #51 | 1,642 | 0 | 3 | 1995 | 24–27 | 47.1% | #54 | 1,760 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2004 | 18–25 | 41.9% | #95 | 1,595 | 0 | 3 | 1996 | 38–21 | 64.4% | #21 | 1,805 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2005 | 5–10 | 33.3% | #191 | 1,557 | 0 | 3 | 1997 | 37–25 | 59.7% | #20 | 1,834 | 0 | 2 |
| 29 | 2006 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #687 | 1,567 | 0 | 3 | 1998 | 38–26 | 59.4% | #18 | 1,764 | 0 | 2 |
| 30 | 2007 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #1107 | 1,503 | 0 | 3 | 1999 | 37–28 | 56.9% | #13 | 1,795 | 0 | 3 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2000 | 32–19 | 62.7% | #16 | 1,760 | 0 | 5 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2001 | 17–22 | 43.6% | #84 | 1,657 | 0 | 5 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2002 | 10–16 | 38.5% | #119 | 1,618 | 0 | 5 |