H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 13:16 UTC
Kyle Edmund vs Rajeev Ram H2H: 1-0
Kyle Edmund holds a 1–0 lead over Rajeev Ram in their ATP head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Kyle Edmund leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Kyle Edmund won the 2016 Winston-Salem second round 7-5 7-6(5).
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
Great Britain
Age 31
Right-Handed
188 cm / 6'2"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
USA
Age 42
Right-Handed
193 cm / 6'4"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 23, 2016* | Winston-Salem | ATP 250 | R64 | Hard | Kyle Edmund | 7-5 7-6(5) | Rajeev Ram | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kyle Edmund | #703 | #14 | 2,330 | 2,002 | 113 | 120 | 48.5% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| Rajeev Ram | #1,076 | #56 | 826 | 1,747 | 57 | 94 | 37.7% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
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 | Kyle Edmund | Rajeev Ram | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 18 | 2013 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #376 | 1,509 | 0 | 0 | 2002 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #536 | 1,479 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2014 | 0–5 | 0.0% | #194 | 1,473 | 0 | 0 | 2003 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #437 | 1,492 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2015 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #102 | 1,580 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #297 | 1,474 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2016 | 19–18 | 51.4% | #45 | 1,891 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #195 | 1,490 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2017 | 29–27 | 51.8% | #50 | 1,877 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #197 | 1,457 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2018 | 37–21 | 63.8% | #14 | 1,958 | 0 | 1 | 2007 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #253 | 1,417 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2019 | 14–22 | 38.9% | #69 | 1,772 | 0 | 1 | 2008 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #190 | 1,479 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2020 | 10–9 | 52.6% | #48 | 1,765 | 0 | 2 | 2009 | 8–6 | 57.1% | #79 | 1,579 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2010 | 6–18 | 25.0% | #184 | 1,590 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2022 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #581 | 1,736 | 0 | 2 | 2011 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #149 | 1,605 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2023 | 0–7 | 0.0% | #538 | 1,654 | 0 | 2 | 2012 | 7–9 | 43.8% | #132 | 1,635 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2013 | 4–11 | 26.7% | #127 | 1,646 | 0 | 1 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2014 | 3–7 | 30.0% | #139 | 1,660 | 0 | 1 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2015 | 7–6 | 53.8% | #89 | 1,654 | 0 | 2 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2016 | 12–19 | 38.7% | #129 | 1,615 | 0 | 2 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2017 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #353 | 1,582 | 0 | 2 |