H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 14:16 UTC
Marko Ostoja vs Tomas Smid H2H: 2-1
Marko Ostoja holds a 2–1 lead over Tomas Smid in their ATP head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Tomas Smid leads 1–0 on carpet, while Marko Ostoja leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Tomas Smid won the 1984 Luxembourg third round 6-4 6-2.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
CRO
Age 65
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H
2
–
1
3 main draw meetings
CZE
Age 70
Right-Handed
190 cm / 6'3"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 12, 1984* | Luxembourg | ATP 250 | R32 | Carpet | Tomas Smid | 6-4 6-2 | Marko Ostoja | Match data |
| Oct 20, 1983* | Vienna | ATP 250 | R32 | Hard | Marko Ostoja | 2-6 6-4 6-3 | Tomas Smid | Match data |
| May 20, 1981* | Rome | Masters 1000 | R64 | Clay | Marko Ostoja | 3-6 6-3 6-1 | Tomas Smid | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Marko Ostoja | #1,220 | #74 | 92 | 1,711 | 77 | 136 | 36.2% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| 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 | Marko Ostoja | Tomas Smid | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 18 | 1979 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #377 | 1,498 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 1980 | 4–7 | 36.4% | #203 | 1,506 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 1981 | 14–20 | 41.2% | #203 | 1,591 | 0 | 1 | 1976 | 5–7 | 41.7% | #154 | 1,542 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1982 | 14–21 | 40.0% | #172 | 1,583 | 0 | 1 | 1977 | 16–18 | 47.1% | #67 | 1,637 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1983 | 7–9 | 43.8% | #95 | 1,586 | 0 | 1 | 1978 | 36–25 | 59.0% | #36 | 1,799 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 1984 | 13–21 | 38.2% | #125 | 1,613 | 0 | 1 | 1979 | 50–25 | 66.7% | #27 | 1,870 | 0 | 2 |
| 24 | 1985 | 7–18 | 28.0% | #166 | 1,546 | 0 | 1 | 1980 | 45–21 | 68.2% | #23 | 1,950 | 0 | 4 |
| 25 | 1986 | 10–18 | 35.7% | #136 | 1,544 | 0 | 1 | 1981 | 54–28 | 65.9% | #28 | 1,864 | 0 | 5 |
| 26 | 1987 | 0–5 | 0.0% | #467 | 1,482 | 0 | 1 | 1982 | 62–28 | 68.9% | #24 | 1,901 | 0 | 7 |
| 27 | 1988 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #199 | 1,512 | 0 | 1 | 1983 | 59–30 | 66.3% | #17 | 1,902 | 0 | 9 |
| 28 | 1989 | 5–10 | 33.3% | #224 | 1,511 | 0 | 1 | 1984 | 46–27 | 63.0% | #16 | 1,840 | 0 | 9 |
| 29 | 1990 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #624 | 1,494 | 0 | 1 | 1985 | 47–27 | 63.5% | #19 | 1,804 | 0 | 10 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1986 | 28–24 | 53.8% | #54 | 1,721 | 0 | 10 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 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 |