H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Libor Pimek vs Mel Purcell H2H: 1-2
Mel Purcell holds a 2–1 lead over Libor Pimek in their ATP head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on clay, while Mel Purcell leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Libor Pimek won the 1987 Boston second round 6-4 7-5.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
BEL
Age 62
Right-Handed
195 cm / 6'5"
H2H
1
–
2
3 main draw meetings
USA
Age 67
Right-Handed
178 cm / 5'10"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 8, 1987* | Boston | ATP 250 | R64 | Clay | Libor Pimek | 6-4 7-5 | Mel Purcell | Match data |
| Aug 29, 1985* | US Open | Grand Slam | R128 | Hard | Mel Purcell | 6-3 6-4 6-2 | Libor Pimek | Match data |
| Apr 19, 1984* | Monte Carlo | ATP 250 | R32 | Clay | Mel Purcell | 6-4 6-2 | Libor Pimek | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Libor Pimek | #1,308 | #21 | 73 | 1,860 | 124 | 119 | 51.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Mel Purcell | #673 | #21 | 21 | 1,991 | 190 | 164 | 53.7% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
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 | Libor Pimek | Mel Purcell | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1978 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #555 | 1,474 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1983 | 19–14 | 57.6% | #57 | 1,678 | 0 | 0 | 1979 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #245 | 1,508 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1984 | 31–18 | 63.3% | #25 | 1,764 | 0 | 1 | 1980 | 19–13 | 59.4% | #27 | 1,742 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1985 | 25–19 | 56.8% | #34 | 1,784 | 0 | 1 | 1981 | 48–20 | 70.6% | #24 | 1,914 | 0 | 3 |
| 22 | 1986 | 26–25 | 51.0% | #71 | 1,693 | 0 | 1 | 1982 | 38–24 | 61.3% | #28 | 1,837 | 0 | 3 |
| 23 | 1987 | 12–18 | 40.0% | #95 | 1,659 | 0 | 1 | 1983 | 30–25 | 54.5% | #28 | 1,770 | 0 | 3 |
| 24 | 1988 | 10–20 | 33.3% | #234 | 1,563 | 0 | 1 | 1984 | 20–21 | 48.8% | #67 | 1,702 | 0 | 3 |
| 25 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1985 | 6–9 | 40.0% | #129 | 1,705 | 0 | 3 |
| 26 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1986 | 12–16 | 42.9% | #72 | 1,649 | 0 | 3 |
| 27 | 1991 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #332 | 1,530 | 0 | 1 | 1987 | 12–23 | 34.3% | #140 | 1,529 | 0 | 3 |
| 28 | 1992 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #742 | 1,517 | 0 | 1 | 1988 | 3–6 | 33.3% | #268 | 1,537 | 0 | 3 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1989 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #504 | 1,525 | 0 | 3 |