H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 07:16 UTC
Magnus Norman vs Thomas Johansson H2H: 1-3
Thomas Johansson holds a 3–1 lead over Magnus Norman in their ATP head-to-head. Across 4 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on clay, while Thomas Johansson leads 2–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Thomas Johansson won the 2002 Madrid Masters third round 2-6 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.
SWE
Age 50
Right-Handed
187 cm / 6'2"
H2H
1
–
3
4 main draw meetings
SWE
Age 51
Right-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 17, 2002* | Madrid Masters | Masters 1000 | R32 | Hard | Thomas Johansson | 2-6 6-3 6-4 | Magnus Norman | Match data |
| Apr 17, 2002* | Monte Carlo Masters | Masters 1000 | R64 | Clay | Thomas Johansson | 2-6 7-6(4) 6-1 | Magnus Norman | Match data |
| Nov 25, 2000* | Stockholm | ATP 250 | SF | Hard | Thomas Johansson | 7-6(4) 6-2 | Magnus Norman | Match data |
| May 17, 2000* | Hamburg Masters | Masters 1000 | R64 | Clay | Magnus Norman | 6-2 6-4 | Thomas Johansson | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Magnus Norman | #500 | #2 | 3,610 | 2,041 | 234 | 163 | 58.9% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 11 | 12 |
| Thomas Johansson | #586 | #7 | 2,365 | 1,969 | 336 | 277 | 54.8% | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 9 |
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 | Magnus Norman | Thomas Johansson | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | 1992 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #690 | 1,489 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1993 | 2–1 | 66.7% | #422 | 1,535 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1995 | 3–2 | 60.0% | #170 | 1,542 | 0 | 0 | 1994 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #486 | 1,496 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1996 | 13–10 | 56.5% | #86 | 1,672 | 0 | 0 | 1995 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #117 | 1,492 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1997 | 42–26 | 61.8% | #22 | 1,822 | 0 | 1 | 1996 | 28–21 | 57.1% | #60 | 1,763 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1998 | 24–28 | 46.2% | #52 | 1,720 | 0 | 2 | 1997 | 32–27 | 54.2% | #39 | 1,699 | 0 | 2 |
| 23 | 1999 | 43–21 | 67.2% | #15 | 1,890 | 0 | 7 | 1998 | 46–30 | 60.5% | #17 | 1,899 | 0 | 2 |
| 24 | 2000 | 64–23 | 73.6% | #4 | 1,885 | 0 | 12 | 1999 | 21–23 | 47.7% | #39 | 1,725 | 0 | 3 |
| 25 | 2001 | 23–17 | 57.5% | #49 | 1,751 | 0 | 12 | 2000 | 22–25 | 46.8% | #39 | 1,825 | 0 | 4 |
| 26 | 2002 | 12–19 | 38.7% | #107 | 1,673 | 0 | 12 | 2001 | 42–23 | 64.6% | #18 | 1,875 | 0 | 6 |
| 27 | 2003 | 10–16 | 38.5% | #125 | 1,595 | 0 | 12 | 2002 | 26–22 | 54.2% | #14 | 1,746 | 1 | 7 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2004 | 29–20 | 59.2% | #30 | 1,855 | 1 | 8 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2005 | 42–24 | 63.6% | #13 | 1,892 | 1 | 9 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2006 | 11–16 | 40.7% | #71 | 1,723 | 1 | 9 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2007 | 23–23 | 50.0% | #62 | 1,759 | 1 | 9 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2008 | 11–17 | 39.3% | #136 | 1,673 | 1 | 9 |