H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 14:16 UTC
Nikolay Davydenko vs Daniel Gimeno-Traver H2H: 1-1
Nikolay Davydenko and Daniel Gimeno-Traver are tied 1–1 in their ATP head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on clay. Most recently, Daniel Gimeno-Traver won the 2010 Stuttgart fourth round 7-6(7) 2-6 6-1.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
RUS
Age 45
Right-Handed
178 cm / 5'10"
H2H
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
ESP
Age 40
Right-Handed
183 cm / 6'0"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 16, 2010* | Stuttgart | ATP 250 | R16 | Clay | Daniel Gimeno-Traver | 7-6(7) 2-6 6-1 | Nikolay Davydenko | Match data |
| Jul 30, 2009* | Umag | ATP 250 | R32 | Clay | Nikolay Davydenko | 6-2 6-2 | Daniel Gimeno-Traver | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nikolay Davydenko | #248 | #3 | 5,335 | 2,213 | 467 | 324 | 59.0% | 0 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 16 | 21 |
| Daniel Gimeno-Traver | #1,222 | #48 | 998 | 1,809 | 95 | 169 | 36.0% | 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 | Nikolay Davydenko | Daniel Gimeno-Traver | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2004 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #180 | 1,481 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2000 | 3–1 | 75.0% | #133 | 1,544 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #192 | 1,503 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2001 | 6–15 | 28.6% | #79 | 1,568 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #267 | 1,505 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2002 | 12–24 | 33.3% | #81 | 1,601 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 22 | 2003 | 29–30 | 49.2% | #44 | 1,595 | 0 | 2 | 2008 | 7–7 | 50.0% | #90 | 1,631 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2004 | 32–28 | 53.3% | #28 | 1,758 | 0 | 4 | 2009 | 9–20 | 31.0% | #72 | 1,640 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2005 | 52–29 | 64.2% | #5 | 1,868 | 0 | 5 | 2010 | 17–23 | 42.5% | #56 | 1,732 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2006 | 67–28 | 70.5% | #3 | 1,971 | 0 | 10 | 2011 | 8–23 | 25.8% | #107 | 1,644 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2007 | 53–30 | 63.9% | #4 | 1,935 | 0 | 11 | 2012 | 6–12 | 33.3% | #70 | 1,620 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2008 | 51–20 | 71.8% | #5 | 1,974 | 0 | 14 | 2013 | 14–27 | 34.1% | #77 | 1,576 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2009 | 57–19 | 75.0% | #6 | 2,142 | 0 | 19 | 2014 | 11–20 | 35.5% | #112 | 1,625 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2010 | 29–19 | 60.4% | #22 | 1,897 | 0 | 20 | 2015 | 13–18 | 41.9% | #98 | 1,609 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2011 | 26–25 | 51.0% | #41 | 1,848 | 0 | 21 | 2016 | 8–10 | 44.4% | #115 | 1,684 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | 2012 | 23–24 | 48.9% | #44 | 1,824 | 0 | 21 | 2017 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #366 | 1,630 | 0 | 0 |
| 32 | 2013 | 22–22 | 50.0% | #53 | 1,824 | 0 | 21 | 2018 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #189 | 1,611 | 0 | 0 |
| 33 | 2014 | 5–10 | 33.3% | #250 | 1,730 | 0 | 21 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |