H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 14:16 UTC
Michael Chang vs Johan Kriek H2H: 1-1
Michael Chang and Johan Kriek are tied 1–1 in their ATP head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Michael Chang leads 1–0 on carpet, while Johan Kriek leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Johan Kriek won the 1989 Memphis semifinal 6-1 1-6 6-3.
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
–
1
2 main draw meetings
USA
Age 68
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 18, 1989* | Memphis | ATP 250 | SF | Hard | Johan Kriek | 6-1 1-6 6-3 | Michael Chang | Match data |
| Oct 2, 1988* | San Francisco | ATP 250 | F | Carpet | Michael Chang | 6-2 6-3 | Johan Kriek | 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 |
| Johan Kriek | #859 | #7 | 268 | 2,052 | 380 | 223 | 63.0% | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 12 | 14 |
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 | Johan Kriek | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1977 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #278 | 1,510 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1992 | 57–22 | 72.2% | #6 | 1,975 | 1 | 8 | 1978 | 22–11 | 66.7% | #27 | 1,781 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1993 | 62–21 | 74.7% | #8 | 1,992 | 1 | 13 | 1979 | 33–22 | 60.0% | #35 | 1,879 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 1994 | 66–19 | 77.6% | #6 | 2,005 | 1 | 19 | 1980 | 39–24 | 61.9% | #17 | 1,976 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 1995 | 65–19 | 77.4% | #5 | 2,008 | 1 | 23 | 1981 | 38–15 | 71.7% | #19 | 1,955 | 1 | 4 |
| 24 | 1996 | 63–19 | 76.8% | #2 | 1,985 | 1 | 26 | 1982 | 41–21 | 66.1% | #9 | 1,960 | 2 | 7 |
| 25 | 1997 | 53–18 | 74.6% | #3 | 1,910 | 1 | 31 | 1983 | 39–19 | 67.2% | #15 | 1,952 | 2 | 10 |
| 26 | 1998 | 35–16 | 68.6% | #29 | 1,838 | 1 | 33 | 1984 | 37–17 | 68.5% | #13 | 1,916 | 2 | 12 |
| 27 | 1999 | 27–22 | 55.1% | #50 | 1,788 | 1 | 33 | 1985 | 43–21 | 67.2% | #14 | 1,907 | 2 | 13 |
| 28 | 2000 | 42–25 | 62.7% | #32 | 1,818 | 1 | 34 | 1986 | 21–14 | 60.0% | #23 | 1,880 | 2 | 13 |
| 29 | 2001 | 16–21 | 43.2% | #94 | 1,701 | 1 | 34 | 1987 | 26–20 | 56.5% | #48 | 1,737 | 2 | 14 |
| 30 | 2002 | 7–18 | 28.0% | #124 | 1,625 | 1 | 34 | 1988 | 25–18 | 58.1% | #39 | 1,788 | 2 | 14 |
| 31 | 2003 | 2–10 | 16.7% | #383 | 1,551 | 1 | 34 | 1989 | 12–10 | 54.5% | #52 | 1,700 | 2 | 14 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1990 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #413 | 1,683 | 2 | 14 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1991 | 3–7 | 30.0% | #274 | 1,611 | 2 | 14 |
| 34 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1992 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #1097 | 1,593 | 2 | 14 |