H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC

John Isner vs Tommy Haas H2H: 3-3

John Isner and Tommy Haas are tied 3–3 in their ATP head-to-head. Across 6 main-draw meetings, John Isner leads 3–2 on hard courts, while Tommy Haas leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Tommy Haas won the 2013 Roland Garros third round 7-5 7-6(4) 4-6 6-7(10) 10-8.

Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.

John Isner
USA Age 41 Right-Handed 208 cm / 6'10"
H2H
3 – 3
6 main draw meetings
Tommy Haas
GER Age 48 Right-Handed 188 cm / 6'2"

H2H Match Log

DateTournamentCategoryRoundSurfaceWinnerScoreLoserMatch
Jun 2, 2013* Roland Garros Grand Slam R32 Clay Tommy Haas #14 7-5 7-6(4) 4-6 6-7(10) 10-8 John Isner #21 Match data
Feb 16, 2013* San Jose ATP 250 SF Hard Tommy Haas #22 6-3 6-4 John Isner #16 Match data
Aug 18, 2009* Cincinnati Masters Masters 1000 R64 Hard John Isner #59 7-6(5) 5-7 7-6(3) Tommy Haas #21 Match data
Jul 14, 2008 Indianapolis ATP 250 R16 Hard Tommy Haas #46 6-3 6-4 John Isner #96 Match data
Feb 22, 2008* San Jose ATP 250 R16 Hard John Isner #106 4-6 7-6(6) 6-3 Tommy Haas #26 Match data
Aug 4, 2007* Washington ATP 500 QF Hard John Isner #416 6-4 6-7(6) 7-6(5) Tommy Haas #12 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 Isner #660 #8 3,720 2,053 467 293 61.4% 0 1 0 0 15 16
Tommy Haas #616 #2 3,030 2,103 533 330 61.8% 0 1 0 3 11 15

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 Isner Tommy Haas
YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles
18 — — — — — — — 1996 4–3 57.1% #170 1,587 0 0
19 — — — — — — — 1997 22–17 56.4% #45 1,721 0 0
20 — — — — — — — 1998 34–26 56.7% #34 1,840 0 0
21 — — — — — — — 1999 45–23 66.2% #11 1,859 0 1
22 2007 8–5 61.5% #106 1,656 0 0 2000 27–20 57.4% #23 1,777 0 1
23 2008 11–19 36.7% #144 1,608 0 0 2001 53–21 71.6% #8 2,009 0 5
24 2009 27–18 60.0% #34 1,828 0 0 2002 43–22 66.2% #11 1,849 0 5
25 2010 38–20 65.5% #19 1,882 0 1 — — — — — — —
26 2011 34–19 64.2% #18 2,021 0 3 2004 35–18 66.0% #17 1,909 0 7
27 2012 38–18 67.9% #14 1,965 0 5 2005 28–21 57.1% #45 1,766 0 7
28 2013 38–22 63.3% #14 1,983 0 7 2006 48–19 71.6% #11 1,893 0 10
29 2014 37–21 63.8% #19 1,922 0 9 2007 36–17 67.9% #12 1,892 0 11
30 2015 45–23 66.2% #11 2,026 0 10 2008 18–15 54.5% #82 1,855 0 11
31 2016 30–20 60.0% #19 2,019 0 10 2009 31–18 63.3% #18 1,913 0 12
32 2017 36–21 63.2% #17 1,984 0 12 2010 3–4 42.9% #372 1,844 0 12
33 2018 32–22 59.3% #10 1,956 0 14 2011 7–12 36.8% #205 1,762 0 12
34 2019 29–17 63.0% #19 1,921 0 15 2012 31–17 64.6% #21 1,966 0 13
35 2020 10–7 58.8% #25 1,845 0 15 2013 46–23 66.7% #12 2,011 0 15
36 2021 23–11 67.6% #24 1,933 0 16 2014 14–11 56.0% #77 1,904 0 15
37 2022 22–16 57.9% #41 1,891 0 16 2015 2–9 18.2% #470 1,784 0 15
38 2023 9–14 39.1% #172 1,698 0 16 — — — — — — —
39 — — — — — — — 2017 6–14 30.0% #252 1,686 0 15