H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Michael Chang vs Karol Kucera H2H: 1-2
Karol Kucera holds a 2–1 lead over Michael Chang in their ATP head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on clay, while Karol Kucera leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Karol Kucera won the 1999 Rome Masters third round 7-5 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
–
2
3 main draw meetings
SVK
Age 52
Right-Handed
188 cm / 6'2"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 13, 1999* | Rome Masters | Masters 1000 | R32 | Clay | Karol Kucera | 7-5 6-3 | Michael Chang | Match data |
| Aug 24, 1996* | Long Island | ATP 250 | QF | Hard | Karol Kucera | 6-4 6-4 | Michael Chang | Match data |
| May 20, 1995* | Rome Masters | Masters 1000 | R16 | Clay | Michael Chang | 6-2 3-6 6-4 | Karol Kucera | 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 |
| Karol Kucera | #1,540 | #6 | 2,732 | 1,994 | 259 | 230 | 53.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 6 |
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 | Karol Kucera | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1991 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #352 | 1,509 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 1990 | 34–19 | 64.2% | #15 | 1,917 | 1 | 4 | 1992 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #210 | 1,506 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1991 | 47–20 | 70.1% | #15 | 2,002 | 1 | 5 | 1993 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #159 | 1,492 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1992 | 57–22 | 72.2% | #6 | 1,975 | 1 | 8 | 1994 | 13–13 | 50.0% | #54 | 1,615 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1993 | 62–21 | 74.7% | #8 | 1,992 | 1 | 13 | 1995 | 21–27 | 43.8% | #79 | 1,623 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 1994 | 66–19 | 77.6% | #6 | 2,005 | 1 | 19 | 1996 | 17–24 | 41.5% | #63 | 1,656 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 1995 | 65–19 | 77.4% | #5 | 2,008 | 1 | 23 | 1997 | 33–27 | 55.0% | #24 | 1,831 | 0 | 2 |
| 24 | 1996 | 63–19 | 76.8% | #2 | 1,985 | 1 | 26 | 1998 | 48–27 | 64.0% | #8 | 1,844 | 0 | 4 |
| 25 | 1997 | 53–18 | 74.6% | #3 | 1,910 | 1 | 31 | 1999 | 38–20 | 65.5% | #17 | 1,851 | 0 | 5 |
| 26 | 1998 | 35–16 | 68.6% | #29 | 1,838 | 1 | 33 | 2000 | 22–21 | 51.2% | #73 | 1,764 | 0 | 5 |
| 27 | 1999 | 27–22 | 55.1% | #50 | 1,788 | 1 | 33 | 2001 | 11–13 | 45.8% | #101 | 1,721 | 0 | 5 |
| 28 | 2000 | 42–25 | 62.7% | #32 | 1,818 | 1 | 34 | 2002 | 18–16 | 52.9% | #83 | 1,755 | 0 | 5 |
| 29 | 2001 | 16–21 | 43.2% | #94 | 1,701 | 1 | 34 | 2003 | 24–18 | 57.1% | #40 | 1,764 | 0 | 6 |
| 30 | 2002 | 7–18 | 28.0% | #124 | 1,625 | 1 | 34 | 2004 | 9–14 | 39.1% | #91 | 1,674 | 0 | 6 |
| 31 | 2003 | 2–10 | 16.7% | #383 | 1,551 | 1 | 34 | 2005 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #310 | 1,669 | 0 | 6 |