H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Paul Haarhuis vs Cedric Pioline H2H: 1-2
Cedric Pioline holds a 2–1 lead over Paul Haarhuis in their ATP head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on hard courts, while Cedric Pioline leads 1–0 on carpet. Most recently, Cedric Pioline won the 1999 Rotterdam third round 3-6 7-6(6) 7-6(5).
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
NED
Age 60
Right-Handed
188 cm / 6'2"
H2H
1
–
2
3 main draw meetings
FRA
Age 57
Right-Handed
188 cm / 6'2"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 18, 1999* | Rotterdam | ATP 250 | R32 | Carpet | Cedric Pioline | 3-6 7-6(6) 7-6(5) | Paul Haarhuis | Match data |
| Aug 29, 1998* | Boston | ATP 250 | SF | Hard | Paul Haarhuis | 7-5 4-6 6-3 | Cedric Pioline | Match data |
| Aug 16, 1993 | Indianapolis | ATP 250 | R32 | Hard | Cedric Pioline | 7-6(0) 6-4 | Paul Haarhuis | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Paul Haarhuis | #623 | #18 | 1,341 | 1,885 | 250 | 245 | 50.5% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Cedric Pioline | #750 | #5 | 2,335 | 1,983 | 370 | 301 | 55.1% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 5 |
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 | Paul Haarhuis | Cedric Pioline | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 20 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1989 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #202 | 1,483 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1990 | 5–12 | 29.4% | #118 | 1,484 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1988 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #462 | 1,488 | 0 | 0 | 1991 | 21–20 | 51.2% | #51 | 1,664 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 1989 | 9–7 | 56.2% | #57 | 1,635 | 0 | 0 | 1992 | 31–27 | 53.4% | #33 | 1,845 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 1990 | 20–25 | 44.4% | #54 | 1,668 | 0 | 0 | 1993 | 51–27 | 65.4% | #10 | 1,936 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 1991 | 25–25 | 50.0% | #37 | 1,728 | 0 | 0 | 1994 | 29–28 | 50.9% | #51 | 1,767 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 1992 | 32–28 | 53.3% | #39 | 1,681 | 0 | 0 | 1995 | 24–27 | 47.1% | #54 | 1,760 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 1993 | 30–26 | 53.6% | #42 | 1,762 | 0 | 0 | 1996 | 38–21 | 64.4% | #21 | 1,805 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 1994 | 26–22 | 54.2% | #37 | 1,714 | 0 | 0 | 1997 | 37–25 | 59.7% | #20 | 1,834 | 0 | 2 |
| 29 | 1995 | 33–24 | 57.9% | #19 | 1,714 | 0 | 1 | 1998 | 38–26 | 59.4% | #18 | 1,764 | 0 | 2 |
| 30 | 1996 | 30–27 | 52.6% | #25 | 1,746 | 0 | 1 | 1999 | 37–28 | 56.9% | #13 | 1,795 | 0 | 3 |
| 31 | 1997 | 19–25 | 43.2% | #70 | 1,676 | 0 | 1 | 2000 | 32–19 | 62.7% | #16 | 1,760 | 0 | 5 |
| 32 | 1998 | 20–20 | 50.0% | #74 | 1,663 | 0 | 1 | 2001 | 17–22 | 43.6% | #84 | 1,657 | 0 | 5 |
| 33 | 1999 | 6–15 | 28.6% | #178 | 1,620 | 0 | 1 | 2002 | 10–16 | 38.5% | #119 | 1,618 | 0 | 5 |