H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 07:16 UTC
Lukas Rosol vs Tobias Kamke H2H: 0-1
Tobias Kamke holds a 1–0 lead over Lukas Rosol in their ATP head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Tobias Kamke leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Tobias Kamke won the 2013 Hamburg second round 6-3 6-0.
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 40
Right-Handed
193 cm / 6'4"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
GER
Age 40
Right-Handed
178 cm / 5'10"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 17, 2013* | Hamburg | ATP 500 | R64 | Clay | Tobias Kamke | 6-3 6-0 | Lukas Rosol | Match data |
| Feb 21, 2011 | Dubai | ATP 500 | Q2 | Hard | Lukas Rosol | 6-1 2-6 6-4 | Tobias Kamke | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lukas Rosol | #1,777 | #26 | 1,290 | 1,921 | 110 | 148 | 42.6% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| Tobias Kamke | #1,114 | #64 | 744 | 1,764 | 60 | 99 | 37.7% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
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 | Lukas Rosol | Tobias Kamke | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 21 | 2007 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #271 | 1,507 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #210 | 1,502 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2008 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #182 | 1,535 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #243 | 1,508 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2009 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #148 | 1,562 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 24 | 2010 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #164 | 1,575 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 7–8 | 46.7% | #67 | 1,638 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2011 | 5–13 | 27.8% | #70 | 1,576 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 15–23 | 39.5% | #96 | 1,736 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2012 | 17–18 | 48.6% | #73 | 1,748 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 6–18 | 25.0% | #98 | 1,626 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2013 | 21–24 | 46.7% | #47 | 1,742 | 0 | 1 | 2013 | 15–20 | 42.9% | #74 | 1,723 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2014 | 28–26 | 51.9% | #31 | 1,798 | 0 | 2 | 2014 | 9–15 | 37.5% | #97 | 1,670 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2015 | 19–28 | 40.4% | #55 | 1,846 | 0 | 2 | 2015 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #277 | 1,584 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2016 | 14–22 | 38.9% | #113 | 1,726 | 0 | 2 | 2016 | 5–5 | 50.0% | #118 | 1,707 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | 2017 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #203 | 1,671 | 0 | 2 | 2017 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #233 | 1,616 | 0 | 0 |
| 32 | 2018 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #142 | 1,703 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 2019 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #180 | 1,660 | 0 | 2 | 2019 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #242 | 1,567 | 0 | 0 |
| 34 | 2020 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #199 | 1,658 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 36 | 2022 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #216 | 1,588 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |