H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Milos Raonic vs Peter Gojowczyk H2H: 1-2
Peter Gojowczyk holds a 2–1 lead over Milos Raonic in their ATP head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on hard courts, while Peter Gojowczyk leads 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Peter Gojowczyk won the 2019 Washington fourth round 6-4 6-4.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
CAN
Age 35
Right-Handed
196 cm / 6'5"
H2H
1
–
2
3 main draw meetings
GER
Age 37
Right-Handed
188 cm / 6'2"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 1, 2019* | Washington | ATP 500 | R16 | Hard | Peter Gojowczyk | 6-4 6-4 | Milos Raonic | Match data |
| Aug 29, 2014* | US Open | Grand Slam | R64 | Hard | Milos Raonic | 7-6(4) 5-7 6-4 7-6(3) | Peter Gojowczyk | Match data |
| Jun 13, 2014* | Halle | ATP 500 | R16 | Grass | Peter Gojowczyk | 6-4 6-4 | Milos Raonic | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Milos Raonic | #634 | #3 | 5,450 | 2,246 | 369 | 186 | 66.5% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Peter Gojowczyk | #1,284 | #39 | 1,175 | 1,885 | 75 | 97 | 43.6% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
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 | Milos Raonic | Peter Gojowczyk | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 18 | 2009 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #373 | 1,535 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 2010 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #156 | 1,651 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 2011 | 30–18 | 62.5% | #31 | 1,839 | 0 | 1 | 2010 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #494 | 1,515 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2012 | 42–20 | 67.7% | #13 | 1,987 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 22 | 2013 | 41–21 | 66.1% | #11 | 2,034 | 0 | 5 | 2012 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #181 | 1,584 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2014 | 47–20 | 70.1% | #8 | 2,087 | 0 | 6 | 2013 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #162 | 1,608 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2015 | 32–15 | 68.1% | #14 | 2,047 | 0 | 7 | 2014 | 7–8 | 46.7% | #79 | 1,697 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2016 | 52–19 | 73.2% | #3 | 2,143 | 0 | 8 | 2015 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #194 | 1,652 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2017 | 29–14 | 67.4% | #24 | 2,053 | 0 | 8 | 2016 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #189 | 1,678 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2018 | 31–18 | 63.3% | #18 | 1,952 | 0 | 8 | 2017 | 14–9 | 60.9% | #60 | 1,809 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2019 | 23–13 | 63.9% | #31 | 1,919 | 0 | 8 | 2018 | 23–25 | 47.9% | #59 | 1,801 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 2020 | 23–10 | 69.7% | #14 | 1,996 | 0 | 8 | 2019 | 10–21 | 32.3% | #117 | 1,671 | 0 | 1 |
| 30 | 2021 | 6–4 | 60.0% | #70 | 1,964 | 0 | 8 | 2020 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #145 | 1,621 | 0 | 1 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2021 | 13–9 | 59.1% | #86 | 1,756 | 0 | 1 |
| 32 | 2023 | 4–4 | 50.0% | #317 | 1,909 | 0 | 8 | 2022 | 4–14 | 22.2% | #235 | 1,585 | 0 | 1 |
| 33 | 2024 | 6–5 | 54.5% | #238 | 1,903 | 0 | 8 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |