H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 17:48 UTC
Jim Grabb vs Dan Goldie H2H: 1-1
Jim Grabb and Dan Goldie are tied 1–1 in their ATP head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Dan Goldie leads 1–0 on carpet, while Jim Grabb leads 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Dan Goldie won the 1991 San Francisco third round 6-4 5-7 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.
USA
Age 62
Right-Handed
193 cm / 6'4"
H2H
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
USA
Age 62
Right-Handed
188 cm / 6'2"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 7, 1991* | San Francisco | ATP 250 | R32 | Carpet | Dan Goldie | 6-4 5-7 6-3 | Jim Grabb | Match data |
| Jul 10, 1986* | Newport | ATP 250 | R32 | Grass | Jim Grabb | 6-1 6-7 6-3 | Dan Goldie | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jim Grabb | #927 | #24 | 760 | 1,828 | 179 | 199 | 47.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| Dan Goldie | #738 | #27 | 457 | 1,855 | 122 | 117 | 51.0% | 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 | Jim Grabb | Dan Goldie | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1983 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,493 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1984 | 7–4 | 63.6% | #101 | 1,615 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1985 | 4–4 | 50.0% | #251 | 1,560 | 0 | 0 | 1985 | 3–9 | 25.0% | #265 | 1,604 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1986 | 7–6 | 53.8% | #94 | 1,636 | 0 | 0 | 1986 | 8–10 | 44.4% | #113 | 1,658 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 1987 | 20–18 | 52.6% | #66 | 1,687 | 0 | 1 | 1987 | 24–19 | 55.8% | #50 | 1,765 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 1988 | 17–23 | 42.5% | #91 | 1,562 | 0 | 1 | 1988 | 36–19 | 65.5% | #29 | 1,801 | 0 | 2 |
| 25 | 1989 | 27–20 | 57.4% | #35 | 1,767 | 0 | 1 | 1989 | 12–14 | 46.2% | #67 | 1,735 | 0 | 2 |
| 26 | 1990 | 16–18 | 47.1% | #72 | 1,687 | 0 | 1 | 1990 | 24–26 | 48.0% | #96 | 1,657 | 0 | 2 |
| 27 | 1991 | 19–23 | 45.2% | #87 | 1,679 | 0 | 1 | 1991 | 8–15 | 34.8% | #181 | 1,573 | 0 | 2 |
| 28 | 1992 | 31–24 | 56.4% | #55 | 1,747 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 1993 | 6–9 | 40.0% | #197 | 1,690 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 1994 | 18–20 | 47.4% | #68 | 1,669 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 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 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |