H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Michael Chang vs Michiel Schapers H2H: 2-0
Michael Chang holds a 2–0 lead over Michiel Schapers in their ATP head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Michael Chang leads 1–0 on grass and 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Michael Chang won the 1992 San Francisco fourth round 6-4 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
2
–
0
2 main draw meetings
NED
Age 66
Right-Handed
201 cm / 6'7"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 7, 1992* | San Francisco | ATP 250 | R16 | Hard | Michael Chang | 6-4 6-3 | Michiel Schapers | Match data |
| Jul 2, 1989* | Wimbledon | Grand Slam | R32 | Grass | Michael Chang | 4-6 6-3 7-5 7-5 | Michiel Schapers | 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 |
| Michiel Schapers | #1,230 | #25 | 606 | 1,841 | 151 | 176 | 46.2% | 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 | Michael Chang | Michiel Schapers | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 1992 | 57–22 | 72.2% | #6 | 1,975 | 1 | 8 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 21 | 1993 | 62–21 | 74.7% | #8 | 1,992 | 1 | 13 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 22 | 1994 | 66–19 | 77.6% | #6 | 2,005 | 1 | 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 23 | 1995 | 65–19 | 77.4% | #5 | 2,008 | 1 | 23 | 1983 | 9–14 | 39.1% | #95 | 1,593 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 1996 | 63–19 | 76.8% | #2 | 1,985 | 1 | 26 | 1984 | 10–11 | 47.6% | #78 | 1,651 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 1997 | 53–18 | 74.6% | #3 | 1,910 | 1 | 31 | 1985 | 12–19 | 38.7% | #105 | 1,646 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 1998 | 35–16 | 68.6% | #29 | 1,838 | 1 | 33 | 1986 | 20–23 | 46.5% | #84 | 1,632 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 1999 | 27–22 | 55.1% | #50 | 1,788 | 1 | 33 | 1987 | 26–20 | 56.5% | #49 | 1,718 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2000 | 42–25 | 62.7% | #32 | 1,818 | 1 | 34 | 1988 | 24–19 | 55.8% | #50 | 1,720 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2001 | 16–21 | 43.2% | #94 | 1,701 | 1 | 34 | 1989 | 19–18 | 51.4% | #79 | 1,658 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2002 | 7–18 | 28.0% | #124 | 1,625 | 1 | 34 | 1990 | 5–13 | 27.8% | #169 | 1,558 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | 2003 | 2–10 | 16.7% | #383 | 1,551 | 1 | 34 | 1991 | 6–5 | 54.5% | #85 | 1,611 | 0 | 0 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1992 | 17–26 | 39.5% | #103 | 1,590 | 0 | 0 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1993 | 3–8 | 27.3% | #270 | 1,525 | 0 | 0 |