H2H data updated: 2026-07-17 14:15 UTC
Michael Chang vs Todd Woodbridge H2H: 14-3
Michael Chang holds a 14–3 lead over Todd Woodbridge in their ATP head-to-head. Across 17 main-draw meetings, Michael Chang leads 8–2 on hard courts and 5–0 on carpet. Most recently, Michael Chang won the 1998 Shanghai quarterfinal 6-2 6-2.
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
14
–
3
17 main draw meetings
AUS
Age 55
Right-Handed
178 cm / 5'10"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 10, 1998* | Shanghai | ATP 250 | QF | Carpet | Michael Chang | 6-2 6-2 | Todd Woodbridge | Match data |
| Aug 12, 1998* | Cincinnati Masters | Masters 1000 | R64 | Hard | Michael Chang | 6-1 3-6 6-2 | Todd Woodbridge | Match data |
| Aug 22, 1997* | Long Island | ATP 250 | R16 | Hard | Michael Chang | 6-0 6-2 | Todd Woodbridge | Match data |
| Jun 25, 1997* | Wimbledon | Grand Slam | R128 | Grass | Todd Woodbridge | 7-6(5) 3-6 6-2 3-6 8-6 | Michael Chang | Match data |
| Feb 23, 1997* | Memphis | ATP 250 | F | Hard | Michael Chang | 6-3 6-4 | Todd Woodbridge | Match data |
| Oct 24, 1996* | Stuttgart Masters | Masters 1000 | R32 | Carpet | Michael Chang | 6-3 6-2 | Todd Woodbridge | Match data |
| Apr 13, 1996* | Hong Kong | ATP 250 | SF | Hard | Michael Chang | 6-3 6-4 | Todd Woodbridge | Match data |
| Sep 3, 1995* | US Open | Grand Slam | R32 | Hard | Michael Chang | 6-3 6-2 6-0 | Todd Woodbridge | Match data |
| Oct 14, 1994* | Tokyo Indoor | ATP 250 | R16 | Carpet | Michael Chang | 3-6 6-4 6-3 | Todd Woodbridge | Match data |
| Jun 25, 1993* | Wimbledon | Grand Slam | R64 | Grass | Michael Chang | 6-7(2) 6-3 6-4 3-6 6-4 | Todd Woodbridge | Match data |
| Apr 16, 1993* | Hong Kong | ATP 250 | R16 | Hard | Michael Chang | 7-6(2) 7-6(0) | Todd Woodbridge | Match data |
| Apr 8, 1993* | Tokyo Outdoor | ATP 250 | R32 | Hard | Todd Woodbridge | 6-3 3-6 7-6(5) | Michael Chang | Match data |
| Nov 13, 1992* | Antwerp | ATP 250 | R16 | Carpet | Michael Chang | 6-1 6-2 | Todd Woodbridge | Match data |
| Apr 18, 1992* | Hong Kong | ATP 250 | SF | Hard | Michael Chang | 6-3 6-7(5) 6-1 | Todd Woodbridge | Match data |
| Apr 11, 1992* | Tokyo Outdoor | ATP 250 | QF | Hard | Michael Chang | 6-4 1-6 6-0 | Todd Woodbridge | Match data |
| Feb 14, 1991* | Brussels | ATP 250 | R32 | Carpet | Michael Chang | 6-4 6-3 | Todd Woodbridge | Match data |
| Aug 16, 1990* | New Haven | ATP 250 | R32 | Hard | Todd Woodbridge | 6-3 1-6 6-3 | 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 |
| Todd Woodbridge | #1,151 | #19 | 1,575 | 1,857 | 237 | 229 | 50.9% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
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 | Todd Woodbridge | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1–6 | 14.3% | #213 | 1,453 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 1990 | 34–19 | 64.2% | #15 | 1,917 | 1 | 4 | 1989 | 6–6 | 50.0% | #131 | 1,573 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1991 | 47–20 | 70.1% | #15 | 2,002 | 1 | 5 | 1990 | 16–17 | 48.5% | #50 | 1,704 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1992 | 57–22 | 72.2% | #6 | 1,975 | 1 | 8 | 1991 | 23–25 | 47.9% | #77 | 1,702 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1993 | 62–21 | 74.7% | #8 | 1,992 | 1 | 13 | 1992 | 25–22 | 53.2% | #54 | 1,684 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1994 | 66–19 | 77.6% | #6 | 2,005 | 1 | 19 | 1993 | 19–20 | 48.7% | #109 | 1,664 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 1995 | 65–19 | 77.4% | #5 | 2,008 | 1 | 23 | 1994 | 15–19 | 44.1% | #90 | 1,661 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 1996 | 63–19 | 76.8% | #2 | 1,985 | 1 | 26 | 1995 | 32–22 | 59.3% | #33 | 1,810 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 1997 | 53–18 | 74.6% | #3 | 1,910 | 1 | 31 | 1996 | 32–23 | 58.2% | #36 | 1,744 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 1998 | 35–16 | 68.6% | #29 | 1,838 | 1 | 33 | 1997 | 31–20 | 60.8% | #26 | 1,796 | 0 | 2 |
| 27 | 1999 | 27–22 | 55.1% | #50 | 1,788 | 1 | 33 | 1998 | 21–21 | 50.0% | #65 | 1,714 | 0 | 2 |
| 28 | 2000 | 42–25 | 62.7% | #32 | 1,818 | 1 | 34 | 1999 | 8–16 | 33.3% | #197 | 1,601 | 0 | 2 |
| 29 | 2001 | 16–21 | 43.2% | #94 | 1,701 | 1 | 34 | 2000 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #187 | 1,588 | 0 | 2 |
| 30 | 2002 | 7–18 | 28.0% | #124 | 1,625 | 1 | 34 | 2001 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #207 | 1,596 | 0 | 2 |
| 31 | 2003 | 2–10 | 16.7% | #383 | 1,551 | 1 | 34 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |