H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Martin Wostenholme vs Mel Purcell H2H: 1-0
Martin Wostenholme holds a 1–0 lead over Mel Purcell in their ATP head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Martin Wostenholme leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Martin Wostenholme won the 1986 Geneva fourth round 6-2 6-1.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
CAN
Age 63
Right-Handed
183 cm / 6'0"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
USA
Age 67
Right-Handed
178 cm / 5'10"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 12, 1986* | Geneva | ATP 250 | R16 | Clay | Martin Wostenholme | 6-2 6-1 | Mel Purcell | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Martin Wostenholme | #1,171 | #84 | 265 | 1,607 | 44 | 79 | 35.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Mel Purcell | #673 | #21 | 21 | 1,991 | 190 | 164 | 53.7% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
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 | Martin Wostenholme | Mel Purcell | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | 1979 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #579 | 1,497 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 1980 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,496 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1978 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #555 | 1,474 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1982 | 2–1 | 66.7% | — | 1,519 | 0 | 0 | 1979 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #245 | 1,508 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1983 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #329 | 1,502 | 0 | 0 | 1980 | 19–13 | 59.4% | #27 | 1,742 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1984 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #186 | 1,526 | 0 | 0 | 1981 | 48–20 | 70.6% | #24 | 1,914 | 0 | 3 |
| 22 | 1985 | 4–8 | 33.3% | #93 | 1,556 | 0 | 0 | 1982 | 38–24 | 61.3% | #28 | 1,837 | 0 | 3 |
| 23 | 1986 | 9–18 | 33.3% | #190 | 1,533 | 0 | 0 | 1983 | 30–25 | 54.5% | #28 | 1,770 | 0 | 3 |
| 24 | 1987 | 2–7 | 22.2% | #251 | 1,494 | 0 | 0 | 1984 | 20–21 | 48.8% | #67 | 1,702 | 0 | 3 |
| 25 | 1988 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #293 | 1,496 | 0 | 0 | 1985 | 6–9 | 40.0% | #129 | 1,705 | 0 | 3 |
| 26 | 1989 | 6–8 | 42.9% | #120 | 1,537 | 0 | 0 | 1986 | 12–16 | 42.9% | #72 | 1,649 | 0 | 3 |
| 27 | 1990 | 10–19 | 34.5% | #156 | 1,509 | 0 | 0 | 1987 | 12–23 | 34.3% | #140 | 1,529 | 0 | 3 |
| 28 | 1991 | 6–7 | 46.2% | #153 | 1,523 | 0 | 0 | 1988 | 3–6 | 33.3% | #268 | 1,537 | 0 | 3 |
| 29 | 1992 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #340 | 1,512 | 0 | 0 | 1989 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #504 | 1,525 | 0 | 3 |