H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Karel Novacek vs Cedric Pioline H2H: 1-2
Cedric Pioline holds a 2–1 lead over Karel Novacek in their ATP head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Cedric Pioline leads 2–1 on clay. Most recently, Cedric Pioline won the 1995 Roland Garros first round 6-1 3-6 6-3 6-4.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
CZE
Age 61
Right-Handed
190 cm / 6'3"
H2H
1
–
2
3 main draw meetings
FRA
Age 57
Right-Handed
188 cm / 6'2"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 31, 1995* | Roland Garros | Grand Slam | R128 | Clay | Cedric Pioline | 6-1 3-6 6-3 6-4 | Karel Novacek | Match data |
| Jul 26, 1991* | Hilversum | ATP 250 | R16 | Clay | Karel Novacek | 6-4 6-4 | Cedric Pioline | Match data |
| Jul 18, 1991* | Stuttgart Outdoor | ATP 250 | R32 | Clay | Cedric Pioline | 6-1 1-6 6-3 | Karel Novacek | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Karel Novacek | #1,345 | #8 | 1,754 | 1,997 | 287 | 231 | 55.4% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 12 | 13 |
| 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 | Karel Novacek | Cedric Pioline | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 19 | 1984 | 6–6 | 50.0% | #138 | 1,554 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 1985 | 4–4 | 50.0% | #159 | 1,558 | 0 | 0 | 1989 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #202 | 1,483 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1986 | 16–14 | 53.3% | #33 | 1,692 | 0 | 1 | 1990 | 5–12 | 29.4% | #118 | 1,484 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1987 | 17–22 | 43.6% | #76 | 1,644 | 0 | 1 | 1991 | 21–20 | 51.2% | #51 | 1,664 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 1988 | 13–13 | 50.0% | #127 | 1,637 | 0 | 1 | 1992 | 31–27 | 53.4% | #33 | 1,845 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 1989 | 16–13 | 55.2% | #74 | 1,685 | 0 | 2 | 1993 | 51–27 | 65.4% | #10 | 1,936 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 1990 | 31–29 | 51.7% | #34 | 1,705 | 0 | 3 | 1994 | 29–28 | 50.9% | #51 | 1,767 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 1991 | 56–29 | 65.9% | #8 | 1,845 | 0 | 7 | 1995 | 24–27 | 47.1% | #54 | 1,760 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 1992 | 37–23 | 61.7% | #23 | 1,819 | 0 | 10 | 1996 | 38–21 | 64.4% | #21 | 1,805 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 1993 | 41–22 | 65.1% | #17 | 1,760 | 0 | 12 | 1997 | 37–25 | 59.7% | #20 | 1,834 | 0 | 2 |
| 29 | 1994 | 36–29 | 55.4% | #28 | 1,788 | 0 | 13 | 1998 | 38–26 | 59.4% | #18 | 1,764 | 0 | 2 |
| 30 | 1995 | 13–24 | 35.1% | #121 | 1,595 | 0 | 13 | 1999 | 37–28 | 56.9% | #13 | 1,795 | 0 | 3 |
| 31 | 1996 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #409 | 1,580 | 0 | 13 | 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 |