H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 14:16 UTC
Jimmy Arias vs Dan Cassidy H2H: 2-0
Jimmy Arias holds a 2–0 lead over Dan Cassidy in their ATP head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Jimmy Arias leads 1–0 on carpet and 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Jimmy Arias won the 1988 Charleston third round 6-2 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 61
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H
2
–
0
2 main draw meetings
USA
Age 65
Right-Handed
178 cm / 5'10"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 28, 1988* | Charleston | ATP 250 | R32 | Clay | Jimmy Arias | 6-2 6-2 | Dan Cassidy | Match data |
| Feb 28, 1985* | Houston | ATP 250 | R32 | Carpet | Jimmy Arias | 6-3 6-4 | Dan Cassidy | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jimmy Arias | #714 | #5 | 587 | 2,067 | 281 | 217 | 56.4% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 5 |
| Dan Cassidy | #753 | #74 | 187 | 1,629 | 35 | 75 | 31.8% | 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 | Jimmy Arias | Dan Cassidy | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 8 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1969 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,486 | 0 | 0 |
| 15 | 1980 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #255 | 1,530 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 16 | 1981 | 10–10 | 50.0% | #84 | 1,626 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 1982 | 30–17 | 63.8% | #21 | 1,858 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 1983 | 47–15 | 75.8% | #6 | 2,045 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 1984 | 35–19 | 64.8% | #14 | 1,879 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 1985 | 32–21 | 60.4% | #21 | 1,810 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 21 | 1986 | 18–19 | 48.6% | #48 | 1,668 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 22 | 1987 | 22–18 | 55.0% | #34 | 1,720 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 23 | 1988 | 7–14 | 33.3% | #106 | 1,615 | 0 | 5 | 1984 | 12–8 | 60.0% | #126 | 1,629 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 1989 | 17–17 | 50.0% | #92 | 1,696 | 0 | 5 | 1985 | 7–19 | 26.9% | #219 | 1,509 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 1990 | 24–26 | 48.0% | #60 | 1,681 | 0 | 5 | 1986 | 2–6 | 25.0% | #274 | 1,511 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 1991 | 23–19 | 54.8% | #63 | 1,691 | 0 | 5 | 1987 | 4–3 | 57.1% | #106 | 1,564 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 1992 | 4–8 | 33.3% | #195 | 1,644 | 0 | 5 | 1988 | 7–21 | 25.0% | #227 | 1,515 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 1993 | 5–4 | 55.6% | #178 | 1,664 | 0 | 5 | 1989 | 3–10 | 23.1% | #140 | 1,457 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 1994 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #334 | 1,638 | 0 | 5 | 1990 | 0–7 | 0.0% | #381 | 1,402 | 0 | 1 |
| 33 | 1998 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #711 | 1,640 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |