H2H data updated: 2026-07-17 14:15 UTC
Karel Novacek vs Tomas Smid H2H: 2-1
Karel Novacek holds a 2–1 lead over Tomas Smid in their ATP head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on hard courts, while Karel Novacek leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Karel Novacek won the 1989 Nice third round 6-1 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
2
–
1
3 main draw meetings
CZE
Age 70
Right-Handed
190 cm / 6'3"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 20, 1989* | Nice | ATP 250 | R32 | Clay | Karel Novacek | 6-1 6-4 | Tomas Smid | Match data |
| Oct 24, 1986* | Vienna | ATP 250 | R16 | Hard | Karel Novacek | 6-2 6-2 | Tomas Smid | Match data |
| Feb 5, 1985* | Delray Beach | Masters 1000 | R128 | Hard | Tomas Smid | 7-5 6-1 | 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 |
| Tomas Smid | #975 | #11 | 28 | 1,998 | 497 | 318 | 61.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 10 |
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 | Tomas Smid | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1976 | 5–7 | 41.7% | #154 | 1,542 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1986 | 16–14 | 53.3% | #33 | 1,692 | 0 | 1 | 1977 | 16–18 | 47.1% | #67 | 1,637 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1987 | 17–22 | 43.6% | #76 | 1,644 | 0 | 1 | 1978 | 36–25 | 59.0% | #36 | 1,799 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 1988 | 13–13 | 50.0% | #127 | 1,637 | 0 | 1 | 1979 | 50–25 | 66.7% | #27 | 1,870 | 0 | 2 |
| 24 | 1989 | 16–13 | 55.2% | #74 | 1,685 | 0 | 2 | 1980 | 45–21 | 68.2% | #23 | 1,950 | 0 | 4 |
| 25 | 1990 | 31–29 | 51.7% | #34 | 1,705 | 0 | 3 | 1981 | 54–28 | 65.9% | #28 | 1,864 | 0 | 5 |
| 26 | 1991 | 56–29 | 65.9% | #8 | 1,845 | 0 | 7 | 1982 | 62–28 | 68.9% | #24 | 1,901 | 0 | 7 |
| 27 | 1992 | 37–23 | 61.7% | #23 | 1,819 | 0 | 10 | 1983 | 59–30 | 66.3% | #17 | 1,902 | 0 | 9 |
| 28 | 1993 | 41–22 | 65.1% | #17 | 1,760 | 0 | 12 | 1984 | 46–27 | 63.0% | #16 | 1,840 | 0 | 9 |
| 29 | 1994 | 36–29 | 55.4% | #28 | 1,788 | 0 | 13 | 1985 | 47–27 | 63.5% | #19 | 1,804 | 0 | 10 |
| 30 | 1995 | 13–24 | 35.1% | #121 | 1,595 | 0 | 13 | 1986 | 28–24 | 53.8% | #54 | 1,721 | 0 | 10 |
| 31 | 1996 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #409 | 1,580 | 0 | 13 | 1987 | 30–26 | 53.6% | #31 | 1,729 | 0 | 10 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1988 | 17–23 | 42.5% | #115 | 1,656 | 0 | 10 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1989 | 2–9 | 18.2% | #453 | 1,537 | 0 | 10 |