H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 14:16 UTC
Marcos Baghdatis vs Daniel Brands H2H: 1-1
Marcos Baghdatis and Daniel Brands are tied 1–1 in their ATP head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on hard courts. Most recently, Daniel Brands won the 2013 Indian Wells Masters first round 6-0 7-6(3).
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
CYP
Age 41
Right-Handed
183 cm / 6'0"
H2H
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
GER
Age 39
Right-Handed
196 cm / 6'5"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 9, 2013* | Indian Wells Masters | Masters 1000 | R128 | Hard | Daniel Brands | 6-0 7-6(3) | Marcos Baghdatis | Match data |
| Feb 18, 2010* | Marseille | ATP 250 | R32 | Hard | Marcos Baghdatis | 6-3 6-2 | Daniel Brands | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Marcos Baghdatis | #179 | #8 | 2,111 | 1,952 | 324 | 272 | 54.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 4 |
| Daniel Brands | #1,055 | #51 | 896 | 1,886 | 57 | 92 | 38.3% | 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 | Marcos Baghdatis | Daniel Brands | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 19 | 2004 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #159 | 1,559 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #220 | 1,491 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2005 | 11–12 | 47.8% | #55 | 1,694 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #150 | 1,539 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2006 | 33–20 | 62.3% | #12 | 1,842 | 0 | 1 | 2009 | 7–5 | 58.3% | #92 | 1,645 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2007 | 44–22 | 66.7% | #16 | 1,937 | 0 | 2 | 2010 | 9–19 | 32.1% | #104 | 1,670 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2008 | 12–12 | 50.0% | #98 | 1,815 | 0 | 2 | 2011 | 4–11 | 26.7% | #110 | 1,690 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2009 | 18–16 | 52.9% | #42 | 1,810 | 0 | 3 | 2012 | 5–8 | 38.5% | #153 | 1,689 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2010 | 41–27 | 60.3% | #20 | 1,852 | 0 | 4 | 2013 | 22–22 | 50.0% | #54 | 1,815 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2011 | 26–27 | 49.1% | #44 | 1,844 | 0 | 4 | 2014 | 2–11 | 15.4% | #329 | 1,713 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2012 | 31–24 | 56.4% | #36 | 1,897 | 0 | 4 | 2015 | 2–1 | 66.7% | #159 | 1,729 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2013 | 14–22 | 38.9% | #87 | 1,804 | 0 | 4 | 2016 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #168 | 1,660 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2014 | 7–11 | 38.9% | #85 | 1,703 | 0 | 4 | 2017 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #320 | 1,662 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2015 | 26–19 | 57.8% | #46 | 1,869 | 0 | 4 | 2018 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #182 | 1,615 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | 2016 | 26–23 | 53.1% | #36 | 1,884 | 0 | 4 | 2019 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #465 | 1,604 | 0 | 0 |
| 32 | 2017 | 18–16 | 52.9% | #102 | 1,839 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 2018 | 12–17 | 41.4% | #124 | 1,723 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 34 | 2019 | 4–3 | 57.1% | #179 | 1,740 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |