H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 14:16 UTC
Mel Purcell vs Chip Hooper H2H: 1-1
Mel Purcell and Chip Hooper are tied 1–1 in their ATP head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Chip Hooper leads 1–0 on carpet, while Mel Purcell leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Mel Purcell won the 1982 Los Angeles fourth round 6-4 7-6.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
USA
Age 67
Right-Handed
178 cm / 5'10"
H2H
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
USA
Age 67
Right-Handed
198 cm / 6'6"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 16, 1982* | Los Angeles | ATP 250 | R16 | Hard | Mel Purcell | 6-4 7-6 | Chip Hooper | Match data |
| Mar 17, 1982* | Rotterdam | ATP 250 | R16 | Carpet | Chip Hooper | 6-4 6-3 | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mel Purcell | #673 | #21 | 21 | 1,991 | 190 | 164 | 53.7% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
| Chip Hooper | #1,046 | #17 | 0 | 1,854 | 104 | 119 | 46.6% | 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 | Mel Purcell | Chip Hooper | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 18 | 1978 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #555 | 1,474 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 1979 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #245 | 1,508 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 1980 | 19–13 | 59.4% | #27 | 1,742 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 21 | 1981 | 48–20 | 70.6% | #24 | 1,914 | 0 | 3 | 1980 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #390 | 1,500 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1982 | 38–24 | 61.3% | #28 | 1,837 | 0 | 3 | 1981 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #390 | 1,538 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 1983 | 30–25 | 54.5% | #28 | 1,770 | 0 | 3 | 1982 | 34–24 | 58.6% | #32 | 1,766 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 1984 | 20–21 | 48.8% | #67 | 1,702 | 0 | 3 | 1983 | 24–24 | 50.0% | #59 | 1,739 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 1985 | 6–9 | 40.0% | #129 | 1,705 | 0 | 3 | 1984 | 18–21 | 46.2% | #96 | 1,600 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 1986 | 12–16 | 42.9% | #72 | 1,649 | 0 | 3 | 1985 | 14–18 | 43.8% | #114 | 1,676 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 1987 | 12–23 | 34.3% | #140 | 1,529 | 0 | 3 | 1986 | 5–12 | 29.4% | #222 | 1,577 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 1988 | 3–6 | 33.3% | #268 | 1,537 | 0 | 3 | 1987 | 6–11 | 35.3% | #150 | 1,552 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 1989 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #504 | 1,525 | 0 | 3 | 1988 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #561 | 1,506 | 0 | 0 |