H2H data updated: 2026-07-14 14:15 UTC
Jim Grabb vs P. Annacone H2H: 1-2
P. Annacone holds a 2–1 lead over Jim Grabb in their ATP head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, P. Annacone leads 2–0 on carpet, while Jim Grabb leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, P. Annacone won the 1987 Chicago third round 6-3 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.
USA
Age 62
Right-Handed
193 cm / 6'4"
H2H
1
–
2
3 main draw meetings
USA
Age 63
Right-Handed
185 cm / 6'1"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 2, 1987* | Chicago | ATP 250 | R32 | Carpet | P. Annacone | 6-3 6-2 | Jim Grabb | Match data |
| Oct 9, 1986* | Scottsdale | ATP 250 | R32 | Hard | Jim Grabb | 3-6 6-3 6-3 | P. Annacone | Match data |
| Sep 26, 1985* | San Francisco | ATP 250 | R32 | Carpet | P. Annacone | 6-2 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jim Grabb | #927 | #24 | 760 | 1,828 | 179 | 199 | 47.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| P. Annacone | #1,209 | #12 | 430 | 1,966 | 160 | 131 | 55.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
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 | P. Annacone | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1982 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,491 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1983 | 5–5 | 50.0% | #389 | 1,533 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1985 | 4–4 | 50.0% | #251 | 1,560 | 0 | 0 | 1984 | 8–9 | 47.1% | #94 | 1,583 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1986 | 7–6 | 53.8% | #94 | 1,636 | 0 | 0 | 1985 | 45–19 | 70.3% | #13 | 1,903 | 0 | 2 |
| 23 | 1987 | 20–18 | 52.6% | #66 | 1,687 | 0 | 1 | 1986 | 18–16 | 52.9% | #43 | 1,787 | 0 | 2 |
| 24 | 1988 | 17–23 | 42.5% | #91 | 1,562 | 0 | 1 | 1987 | 29–20 | 59.2% | #32 | 1,824 | 0 | 2 |
| 25 | 1989 | 27–20 | 57.4% | #35 | 1,767 | 0 | 1 | 1988 | 25–18 | 58.1% | #38 | 1,787 | 0 | 2 |
| 26 | 1990 | 16–18 | 47.1% | #72 | 1,687 | 0 | 1 | 1989 | 17–18 | 48.6% | #65 | 1,732 | 0 | 3 |
| 27 | 1991 | 19–23 | 45.2% | #87 | 1,679 | 0 | 1 | 1990 | 10–17 | 37.0% | #165 | 1,650 | 0 | 3 |
| 28 | 1992 | 31–24 | 56.4% | #55 | 1,747 | 0 | 2 | 1991 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #433 | 1,630 | 0 | 3 |
| 29 | 1993 | 6–9 | 40.0% | #197 | 1,690 | 0 | 2 | 1992 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #225 | 1,588 | 0 | 3 |
| 30 | 1994 | 18–20 | 47.4% | #68 | 1,669 | 0 | 2 | 1993 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #813 | 1,576 | 0 | 3 |
| 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 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |