H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Michael Chang vs Andres Gomez H2H: 1-0
Michael Chang holds a 1–0 lead over Andres Gomez in their ATP head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Michael Chang leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Michael Chang won the 1989 Forest Hills fourth round 6-3 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 54
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
ECU
Age 66
Left-Handed
193 cm / 6'4"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 5, 1989* | Forest Hills | ATP 250 | R16 | Clay | Michael Chang | 6-3 7-6 | Andres Gomez | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Michael Chang | #1,039 | #2 | 4,065 | 2,110 | 648 | 303 | 68.1% | 1 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 26 | 34 |
| Andres Gomez | #1,171 | #4 | 2,005 | 2,092 | 502 | 261 | 65.8% | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 18 | 21 |
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 | Michael Chang | Andres Gomez | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 15 | 1987 | 4–4 | 50.0% | #163 | 1,559 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 16 | 1988 | 23–13 | 63.9% | #30 | 1,842 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 1989 | 45–17 | 72.6% | #5 | 1,971 | 1 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 1990 | 34–19 | 64.2% | #15 | 1,917 | 1 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 1991 | 47–20 | 70.1% | #15 | 2,002 | 1 | 5 | 1979 | 11–8 | 57.9% | #61 | 1,638 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1992 | 57–22 | 72.2% | #6 | 1,975 | 1 | 8 | 1980 | 36–23 | 61.0% | #42 | 1,800 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1993 | 62–21 | 74.7% | #8 | 1,992 | 1 | 13 | 1981 | 36–21 | 63.2% | #37 | 1,899 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 1994 | 66–19 | 77.6% | #6 | 2,005 | 1 | 19 | 1982 | 51–25 | 67.1% | #15 | 1,885 | 0 | 3 |
| 23 | 1995 | 65–19 | 77.4% | #5 | 2,008 | 1 | 23 | 1983 | 43–20 | 68.3% | #14 | 1,959 | 0 | 4 |
| 24 | 1996 | 63–19 | 76.8% | #2 | 1,985 | 1 | 26 | 1984 | 60–13 | 82.2% | #5 | 2,072 | 0 | 9 |
| 25 | 1997 | 53–18 | 74.6% | #3 | 1,910 | 1 | 31 | 1985 | 26–14 | 65.0% | #15 | 1,970 | 0 | 10 |
| 26 | 1998 | 35–16 | 68.6% | #29 | 1,838 | 1 | 33 | 1986 | 57–20 | 74.0% | #10 | 1,898 | 0 | 14 |
| 27 | 1999 | 27–22 | 55.1% | #50 | 1,788 | 1 | 33 | 1987 | 46–18 | 71.9% | #11 | 1,913 | 0 | 15 |
| 28 | 2000 | 42–25 | 62.7% | #32 | 1,818 | 1 | 34 | 1988 | 34–18 | 65.4% | #24 | 1,808 | 0 | 15 |
| 29 | 2001 | 16–21 | 43.2% | #94 | 1,701 | 1 | 34 | 1989 | 32–17 | 65.3% | #17 | 1,868 | 0 | 17 |
| 30 | 2002 | 7–18 | 28.0% | #124 | 1,625 | 1 | 34 | 1990 | 38–27 | 58.5% | #6 | 1,726 | 1 | 20 |
| 31 | 2003 | 2–10 | 16.7% | #383 | 1,551 | 1 | 34 | 1991 | 20–19 | 51.3% | #70 | 1,722 | 1 | 21 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1992 | 10–12 | 45.5% | #179 | 1,676 | 1 | 21 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1993 | 2–6 | 25.0% | #402 | 1,606 | 1 | 21 |