H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 17:48 UTC
Michael Chang vs Nicklas Kulti H2H: 0-1
Nicklas Kulti holds a 1–0 lead over Michael Chang in their ATP head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Nicklas Kulti leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Nicklas Kulti won the 1992 Roland Garros third round 7-6(5) 2-6 6-3 3-6 8-6.
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
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
SWE
Age 55
Right-Handed
190 cm / 6'3"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 31, 1992* | Roland Garros | Grand Slam | R32 | Clay | Nicklas Kulti | 7-6(5) 2-6 6-3 3-6 8-6 | Michael Chang | 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 |
| Nicklas Kulti | #977 | #32 | 826 | 1,819 | 150 | 179 | 45.6% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
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 | Nicklas Kulti | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1988 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #176 | 1,543 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 1990 | 34–19 | 64.2% | #15 | 1,917 | 1 | 4 | 1989 | 7–9 | 43.8% | #118 | 1,581 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1991 | 47–20 | 70.1% | #15 | 2,002 | 1 | 5 | 1990 | 15–11 | 57.7% | #51 | 1,745 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1992 | 57–22 | 72.2% | #6 | 1,975 | 1 | 8 | 1991 | 18–24 | 42.9% | #80 | 1,656 | 0 | 1 |
| 21 | 1993 | 62–21 | 74.7% | #8 | 1,992 | 1 | 13 | 1992 | 18–23 | 43.9% | #79 | 1,611 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 1994 | 66–19 | 77.6% | #6 | 2,005 | 1 | 19 | 1993 | 27–24 | 52.9% | #46 | 1,690 | 0 | 2 |
| 23 | 1995 | 65–19 | 77.4% | #5 | 2,008 | 1 | 23 | 1994 | 20–26 | 43.5% | #99 | 1,675 | 0 | 2 |
| 24 | 1996 | 63–19 | 76.8% | #2 | 1,985 | 1 | 26 | 1995 | 6–8 | 42.9% | #165 | 1,638 | 0 | 2 |
| 25 | 1997 | 53–18 | 74.6% | #3 | 1,910 | 1 | 31 | 1996 | 14–16 | 46.7% | #64 | 1,636 | 0 | 3 |
| 26 | 1998 | 35–16 | 68.6% | #29 | 1,838 | 1 | 33 | 1997 | 9–17 | 34.6% | #154 | 1,578 | 0 | 3 |
| 27 | 1999 | 27–22 | 55.1% | #50 | 1,788 | 1 | 33 | 1998 | 3–3 | 50.0% | #290 | 1,602 | 0 | 3 |
| 28 | 2000 | 42–25 | 62.7% | #32 | 1,818 | 1 | 34 | 1999 | 10–9 | 52.6% | #118 | 1,632 | 0 | 3 |
| 29 | 2001 | 16–21 | 43.2% | #94 | 1,701 | 1 | 34 | 2000 | 0–5 | 0.0% | #421 | 1,558 | 0 | 3 |
| 30 | 2002 | 7–18 | 28.0% | #124 | 1,625 | 1 | 34 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 2003 | 2–10 | 16.7% | #383 | 1,551 | 1 | 34 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |