H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
John Fitzgerald vs Paul Annacone H2H: 0-2
Paul Annacone holds a 2–0 lead over John Fitzgerald in their ATP head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Paul Annacone leads 2–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Paul Annacone won the 1987 Cincinnati third round 6-2 6-7 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.
AUS
Age 65
Right-Handed
183 cm / 6'0"
H2H
0
–
2
2 main draw meetings
USA
Age 63
Right-Handed
185 cm / 6'1"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 20, 1987* | Cincinnati | Masters 1000 | R32 | Hard | Paul Annacone | 6-2 6-7 6-3 | John Fitzgerald | Match data |
| Oct 30, 1986* | Hong Kong | ATP 250 | R32 | Hard | Paul Annacone | 6-2 6-3 | John Fitzgerald | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| John Fitzgerald | #765 | #25 | 321 | 1,857 | 230 | 221 | 51.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 6 |
| Paul 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 | John Fitzgerald | Paul Annacone | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 18 | 1979 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #305 | 1,470 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 1980 | 4–8 | 33.3% | #136 | 1,522 | 0 | 0 | 1982 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,491 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1981 | 26–24 | 52.0% | #60 | 1,674 | 0 | 1 | 1983 | 5–5 | 50.0% | #389 | 1,533 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1982 | 22–22 | 50.0% | #78 | 1,696 | 0 | 2 | 1984 | 8–9 | 47.1% | #94 | 1,583 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1983 | 32–19 | 62.7% | #43 | 1,790 | 0 | 4 | 1985 | 45–19 | 70.3% | #13 | 1,903 | 0 | 2 |
| 23 | 1984 | 27–19 | 58.7% | #37 | 1,786 | 0 | 5 | 1986 | 18–16 | 52.9% | #43 | 1,787 | 0 | 2 |
| 24 | 1985 | 16–21 | 43.2% | #91 | 1,665 | 0 | 5 | 1987 | 29–20 | 59.2% | #32 | 1,824 | 0 | 2 |
| 25 | 1986 | 8–11 | 42.1% | #102 | 1,654 | 0 | 5 | 1988 | 25–18 | 58.1% | #38 | 1,787 | 0 | 2 |
| 26 | 1987 | 18–18 | 50.0% | #73 | 1,679 | 0 | 5 | 1989 | 17–18 | 48.6% | #65 | 1,732 | 0 | 3 |
| 27 | 1988 | 36–19 | 65.5% | #25 | 1,778 | 0 | 6 | 1990 | 10–17 | 37.0% | #165 | 1,650 | 0 | 3 |
| 28 | 1989 | 15–18 | 45.5% | #117 | 1,651 | 0 | 6 | 1991 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #433 | 1,630 | 0 | 3 |
| 29 | 1990 | 6–13 | 31.6% | #188 | 1,587 | 0 | 6 | 1992 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #225 | 1,588 | 0 | 3 |
| 30 | 1991 | 5–7 | 41.7% | #205 | 1,610 | 0 | 6 | 1993 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #813 | 1,576 | 0 | 3 |
| 31 | 1992 | 10–11 | 47.6% | #166 | 1,618 | 0 | 6 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 1993 | 4–5 | 44.4% | #298 | 1,582 | 0 | 6 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 1994 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #792 | 1,575 | 0 | 6 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 34 | 1995 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #765 | 1,570 | 0 | 6 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |