H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Julien Boutter vs Cedric Pioline H2H: 0-2
Cedric Pioline holds a 2–0 lead over Julien Boutter in their ATP head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Cedric Pioline leads 1–0 on clay and 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Cedric Pioline won the 2002 Marseille fourth round 7-6(6) 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.
FRA
Age 52
Right-Handed
190 cm / 6'3"
H2H
0
–
2
2 main draw meetings
FRA
Age 57
Right-Handed
188 cm / 6'2"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 15, 2002* | Marseille | ATP 250 | R16 | Hard | Cedric Pioline | 7-6(6) 6-2 | Julien Boutter | Match data |
| May 29, 1998* | Roland Garros | Grand Slam | R64 | Clay | Cedric Pioline | 7-5 6-3 3-6 6-4 | Julien Boutter | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Julien Boutter | #1,092 | #46 | 790 | 1,817 | 62 | 84 | 42.5% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Cedric Pioline | #750 | #5 | 2,335 | 1,983 | 370 | 301 | 55.1% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 5 |
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 | Julien Boutter | Cedric Pioline | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 20 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1989 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #202 | 1,483 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1990 | 5–12 | 29.4% | #118 | 1,484 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1991 | 21–20 | 51.2% | #51 | 1,664 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1992 | 31–27 | 53.4% | #33 | 1,845 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 1998 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #276 | 1,510 | 0 | 0 | 1993 | 51–27 | 65.4% | #10 | 1,936 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 1999 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #133 | 1,477 | 0 | 0 | 1994 | 29–28 | 50.9% | #51 | 1,767 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2000 | 10–16 | 38.5% | #70 | 1,601 | 0 | 0 | 1995 | 24–27 | 47.1% | #54 | 1,760 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2001 | 25–25 | 50.0% | #53 | 1,757 | 0 | 0 | 1996 | 38–21 | 64.4% | #21 | 1,805 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2002 | 16–25 | 39.0% | #77 | 1,607 | 0 | 0 | 1997 | 37–25 | 59.7% | #20 | 1,834 | 0 | 2 |
| 29 | 2003 | 8–7 | 53.3% | #110 | 1,639 | 0 | 1 | 1998 | 38–26 | 59.4% | #18 | 1,764 | 0 | 2 |
| 30 | 2004 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #597 | 1,588 | 0 | 1 | 1999 | 37–28 | 56.9% | #13 | 1,795 | 0 | 3 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2000 | 32–19 | 62.7% | #16 | 1,760 | 0 | 5 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2001 | 17–22 | 43.6% | #84 | 1,657 | 0 | 5 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2002 | 10–16 | 38.5% | #119 | 1,618 | 0 | 5 |