H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 01:16 UTC
Marat Safin vs Michael Chang H2H: 2-1
Marat Safin holds a 2–1 lead over Michael Chang in their ATP head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on hard courts, while Marat Safin leads 1–0 on carpet. Most recently, Marat Safin won the 2002 Auckland 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.
RUS
Age 46
Right-Handed
193 cm / 6'4"
H2H
2
–
1
3 main draw meetings
USA
Age 54
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 10, 2002* | Auckland | ATP 250 | R32 | Hard | Marat Safin | 2-6 6-3 6-4 | Michael Chang | Match data |
| Nov 7, 1999* | Paris Masters | Masters 1000 | SF | Carpet | Marat Safin | 6-7(5) 7-6(5) 6-3 | Michael Chang | Match data |
| Aug 11, 1999* | Cincinnati Masters | Masters 1000 | R64 | Hard | Michael Chang | 6-3 6-4 | Marat Safin | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Marat Safin | #61 | #1 | 4,300 | 2,100 | 395 | 247 | 61.5% | 2 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 15 |
| Michael Chang | #1,039 | #2 | 4,065 | 2,110 | 648 | 303 | 68.1% | 1 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 26 | 34 |
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 | Marat Safin | Michael Chang | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1987 | 4–4 | 50.0% | #163 | 1,559 | 0 | 0 |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1988 | 23–13 | 63.9% | #30 | 1,842 | 0 | 1 |
| 17 | 1997 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #203 | 1,490 | 0 | 0 | 1989 | 45–17 | 72.6% | #5 | 1,971 | 1 | 3 |
| 18 | 1998 | 16–16 | 50.0% | #49 | 1,664 | 0 | 0 | 1990 | 34–19 | 64.2% | #15 | 1,917 | 1 | 4 |
| 19 | 1999 | 36–29 | 55.4% | #24 | 1,775 | 0 | 1 | 1991 | 47–20 | 70.1% | #15 | 2,002 | 1 | 5 |
| 20 | 2000 | 69–23 | 75.0% | #2 | 2,060 | 1 | 8 | 1992 | 57–22 | 72.2% | #6 | 1,975 | 1 | 8 |
| 21 | 2001 | 43–23 | 65.2% | #11 | 1,923 | 1 | 10 | 1993 | 62–21 | 74.7% | #8 | 1,992 | 1 | 13 |
| 22 | 2002 | 48–23 | 67.6% | #3 | 1,892 | 1 | 11 | 1994 | 66–19 | 77.6% | #6 | 2,005 | 1 | 19 |
| 23 | 2003 | 12–13 | 48.0% | #77 | 1,727 | 1 | 11 | 1995 | 65–19 | 77.4% | #5 | 2,008 | 1 | 23 |
| 24 | 2004 | 50–21 | 70.4% | #4 | 1,987 | 1 | 14 | 1996 | 63–19 | 76.8% | #2 | 1,985 | 1 | 26 |
| 25 | 2005 | 25–11 | 69.4% | #12 | 1,948 | 2 | 15 | 1997 | 53–18 | 74.6% | #3 | 1,910 | 1 | 31 |
| 26 | 2006 | 33–23 | 58.9% | #26 | 1,879 | 2 | 15 | 1998 | 35–16 | 68.6% | #29 | 1,838 | 1 | 33 |
| 27 | 2007 | 21–19 | 52.5% | #56 | 1,756 | 2 | 15 | 1999 | 27–22 | 55.1% | #50 | 1,788 | 1 | 33 |
| 28 | 2008 | 24–23 | 51.1% | #29 | 1,780 | 2 | 15 | 2000 | 42–25 | 62.7% | #32 | 1,818 | 1 | 34 |
| 29 | 2009 | 18–22 | 45.0% | #61 | 1,777 | 2 | 15 | 2001 | 16–21 | 43.2% | #94 | 1,701 | 1 | 34 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2002 | 7–18 | 28.0% | #124 | 1,625 | 1 | 34 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2003 | 2–10 | 16.7% | #383 | 1,551 | 1 | 34 |