H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Mel Purcell vs Pavel Slozil H2H: 2-1
Mel Purcell holds a 2–1 lead over Pavel Slozil in their ATP head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Mel Purcell leads 2–1 on clay. Most recently, Mel Purcell won the 1984 Washington fourth round 6-3 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.
USA
Age 67
Right-Handed
178 cm / 5'10"
H2H
2
–
1
3 main draw meetings
CZE
Age 70
Right-Handed
173 cm / 5'8"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 27, 1984* | Washington | ATP 250 | R16 | Clay | Mel Purcell | 6-3 6-2 | Pavel Slozil | Match data |
| Jul 20, 1984* | Boston | ATP 250 | R16 | Clay | Pavel Slozil | 2-6 6-4 7-6 | Mel Purcell | Match data |
| Aug 3, 1981 | Indianapolis | ATP 250 | R64 | Clay | Mel Purcell | 5-0 (ret.) | Pavel Slozil | 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 |
| Pavel Slozil | #550 | #12 | 0 | 1,790 | 142 | 160 | 47.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
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 | Pavel Slozil | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1975 | 1–6 | 14.3% | #218 | 1,481 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1980 | 19–13 | 59.4% | #27 | 1,742 | 0 | 0 | 1976 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #310 | 1,444 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1981 | 48–20 | 70.6% | #24 | 1,914 | 0 | 3 | 1977 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #226 | 1,418 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1982 | 38–24 | 61.3% | #28 | 1,837 | 0 | 3 | 1978 | 5–5 | 50.0% | #190 | 1,509 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 1983 | 30–25 | 54.5% | #28 | 1,770 | 0 | 3 | 1979 | 19–18 | 51.4% | #78 | 1,655 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 1984 | 20–21 | 48.8% | #67 | 1,702 | 0 | 3 | 1980 | 10–10 | 50.0% | #68 | 1,700 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 1985 | 6–9 | 40.0% | #129 | 1,705 | 0 | 3 | 1981 | 18–16 | 52.9% | #68 | 1,719 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 1986 | 12–16 | 42.9% | #72 | 1,649 | 0 | 3 | 1982 | 19–18 | 51.4% | #49 | 1,677 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 1987 | 12–23 | 34.3% | #140 | 1,529 | 0 | 3 | 1983 | 22–21 | 51.2% | #81 | 1,679 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 1988 | 3–6 | 33.3% | #268 | 1,537 | 0 | 3 | 1984 | 21–17 | 55.3% | #40 | 1,732 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 1989 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #504 | 1,525 | 0 | 3 | 1985 | 18–26 | 40.9% | #95 | 1,643 | 0 | 2 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1986 | 8–16 | 33.3% | #165 | 1,587 | 0 | 2 |