H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Luiz Mattar vs Tomas Smid H2H: 2-2
Luiz Mattar and Tomas Smid are tied 2–2 in their ATP head-to-head. Across 4 main-draw meetings, Tomas Smid leads 2–0 on clay, while Luiz Mattar leads 2–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Luiz Mattar won the 1988 Basel third round 4-6 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.
BRA
Age 62
Right-Handed
183 cm / 6'0"
H2H
2
–
2
4 main draw meetings
CZE
Age 70
Right-Handed
190 cm / 6'3"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 7, 1988* | Basel | ATP 250 | R32 | Hard | Luiz Mattar | 4-6 6-3 6-4 | Tomas Smid | Match data |
| Nov 28, 1987* | Itaparica | ATP 250 | SF | Hard | Luiz Mattar | 4-6 7-6 6-4 | Tomas Smid | Match data |
| Apr 22, 1987* | Monte Carlo | ATP 250 | R64 | Clay | Tomas Smid | 6-2 6-2 | Luiz Mattar | Match data |
| Sep 24, 1986* | Barcelona | ATP 250 | R64 | Clay | Tomas Smid | 6-1 7-6 | Luiz Mattar | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Luiz Mattar | #888 | #29 | 796 | 1,772 | 176 | 161 | 52.2% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 7 |
| 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 | Luiz Mattar | Tomas Smid | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 20 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1976 | 5–7 | 41.7% | #154 | 1,542 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1977 | 16–18 | 47.1% | #67 | 1,637 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1986 | 6–7 | 46.2% | #95 | 1,566 | 0 | 0 | 1978 | 36–25 | 59.0% | #36 | 1,799 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 1987 | 24–17 | 58.5% | #38 | 1,696 | 0 | 1 | 1979 | 50–25 | 66.7% | #27 | 1,870 | 0 | 2 |
| 24 | 1988 | 19–16 | 54.3% | #44 | 1,691 | 0 | 2 | 1980 | 45–21 | 68.2% | #23 | 1,950 | 0 | 4 |
| 25 | 1989 | 23–15 | 60.5% | #62 | 1,684 | 0 | 4 | 1981 | 54–28 | 65.9% | #28 | 1,864 | 0 | 5 |
| 26 | 1990 | 25–18 | 58.1% | #43 | 1,696 | 0 | 5 | 1982 | 62–28 | 68.9% | #24 | 1,901 | 0 | 7 |
| 27 | 1991 | 17–24 | 41.5% | #113 | 1,635 | 0 | 5 | 1983 | 59–30 | 66.3% | #17 | 1,902 | 0 | 9 |
| 28 | 1992 | 21–16 | 56.8% | #51 | 1,718 | 0 | 6 | 1984 | 46–27 | 63.0% | #16 | 1,840 | 0 | 9 |
| 29 | 1993 | 19–22 | 46.3% | #70 | 1,691 | 0 | 6 | 1985 | 47–27 | 63.5% | #19 | 1,804 | 0 | 10 |
| 30 | 1994 | 20–18 | 52.6% | #73 | 1,696 | 0 | 7 | 1986 | 28–24 | 53.8% | #54 | 1,721 | 0 | 10 |
| 31 | 1995 | 2–8 | 20.0% | #404 | 1,593 | 0 | 7 | 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 |