H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Pablo Andujar vs Michal Przysiezny H2H: 1-0
Pablo Andujar holds a 1–0 lead over Michal Przysiezny in their ATP head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Pablo Andujar leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Pablo Andujar won the 2014 Kuala Lumpur fourth round 6-4 6-7(6) 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.
ESP
Age 40
Right-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
POL
Right-Handed
185 cm / 6'1"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 26, 2014* | Kuala Lumpur | ATP 250 | R16 | Hard | Pablo Andujar | 6-4 6-7(6) 6-3 | Michal Przysiezny | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pablo Andujar | #1,102 | #32 | 1,205 | 1,862 | 164 | 240 | 40.6% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 4 |
| Michal Przysiezny | #1,345 | #57 | 810 | 1,784 | 19 | 58 | 24.7% | 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.
| Pablo Andujar | Michal Przysiezny | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles |
| 2007 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #146 | 1,623 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #339 | 1,478 | 0 | 0 |
| 2008 | 3–6 | 33.3% | #101 | 1,596 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #257 | 1,507 | 0 | 0 |
| 2009 | 1–12 | 7.7% | #160 | 1,524 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #256 | 1,540 | 0 | 0 |
| 2010 | 8–8 | 50.0% | #71 | 1,703 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #609 | 1,514 | 0 | 0 |
| 2011 | 25–28 | 47.2% | #46 | 1,681 | 0 | 1 | 2009 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #183 | 1,516 | 0 | 0 |
| 2012 | 19–29 | 39.6% | #42 | 1,647 | 0 | 2 | 2010 | 1–12 | 7.7% | #86 | 1,438 | 0 | 0 |
| 2013 | 18–31 | 36.7% | #48 | 1,722 | 0 | 2 | 2011 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #306 | 1,444 | 0 | 0 |
| 2014 | 23–22 | 51.1% | #41 | 1,831 | 0 | 3 | 2013 | 10–11 | 47.6% | #66 | 1,776 | 0 | 0 |
| 2015 | 16–22 | 42.1% | #64 | 1,788 | 0 | 3 | 2014 | 4–17 | 19.0% | #174 | 1,669 | 0 | 0 |
| 2016 | 1–7 | 12.5% | #432 | 1,639 | 0 | 3 | 2015 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #193 | 1,671 | 0 | 0 |
| 2018 | 7–7 | 50.0% | #82 | 1,659 | 0 | 4 | 2016 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #428 | 1,658 | 0 | 0 |
| 2019 | 15–18 | 45.5% | #64 | 1,728 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2020 | 4–12 | 25.0% | #60 | 1,630 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2021 | 12–17 | 41.4% | #91 | 1,737 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2022 | 9–13 | 40.9% | #121 | 1,620 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2023 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #1102 | 1,518 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |