H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 08:25 UTC
Pete Sampras vs Andres Gomez H2H: 2-0
Pete Sampras holds a 2–0 lead over Andres Gomez in their ATP head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Pete Sampras leads 1–0 on carpet and 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Pete Sampras won the 1992 Nice fourth round 7-6(5) 7-5.
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
185 cm / 6'1"
H2H
2
–
0
2 main draw meetings
ECU
Age 66
Left-Handed
193 cm / 6'4"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 17, 1992* | Nice | ATP 250 | R16 | Clay | Pete Sampras | 7-6(5) 7-5 | Andres Gomez | Match data |
| Feb 25, 1990* | Philadelphia | ATP 250 | F | Carpet | Pete Sampras | 7-6 7-5 6-2 | Andres Gomez | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pete Sampras | #34 | #1 | 5,792 | 2,265 | 737 | 208 | 78.0% | 14 | 11 | 7 | 0 | 32 | 64 |
| Andres Gomez | #1,171 | #4 | 2,005 | 2,092 | 502 | 261 | 65.8% | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 18 | 21 |
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 | Pete Sampras | Andres Gomez | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | 1988 | 10–10 | 50.0% | #97 | 1,605 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 1989 | 18–19 | 48.6% | #81 | 1,699 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 1990 | 51–19 | 72.9% | #5 | 2,047 | 1 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 1991 | 52–17 | 75.4% | #6 | 2,091 | 1 | 8 | 1979 | 11–8 | 57.9% | #61 | 1,638 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1992 | 66–15 | 81.5% | #3 | 2,118 | 1 | 13 | 1980 | 36–23 | 61.0% | #42 | 1,800 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1993 | 82–15 | 84.5% | #1 | 2,126 | 3 | 21 | 1981 | 36–21 | 63.2% | #37 | 1,899 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 1994 | 74–9 | 89.2% | #1 | 2,196 | 5 | 31 | 1982 | 51–25 | 67.1% | #15 | 1,885 | 0 | 3 |
| 23 | 1995 | 66–17 | 79.5% | #1 | 2,134 | 7 | 36 | 1983 | 43–20 | 68.3% | #14 | 1,959 | 0 | 4 |
| 24 | 1996 | 66–10 | 86.8% | #1 | 2,183 | 8 | 44 | 1984 | 60–13 | 82.2% | #5 | 2,072 | 0 | 9 |
| 25 | 1997 | 55–10 | 84.6% | #1 | 2,187 | 10 | 52 | 1985 | 26–14 | 65.0% | #15 | 1,970 | 0 | 10 |
| 26 | 1998 | 61–18 | 77.2% | #1 | 2,042 | 11 | 56 | 1986 | 57–20 | 74.0% | #10 | 1,898 | 0 | 14 |
| 27 | 1999 | 38–9 | 80.9% | #3 | 2,117 | 12 | 61 | 1987 | 46–18 | 71.9% | #11 | 1,913 | 0 | 15 |
| 28 | 2000 | 40–11 | 78.4% | #3 | 2,068 | 13 | 63 | 1988 | 34–18 | 65.4% | #24 | 1,808 | 0 | 15 |
| 29 | 2001 | 33–15 | 68.8% | #10 | 2,003 | 13 | 63 | 1989 | 32–17 | 65.3% | #17 | 1,868 | 0 | 17 |
| 30 | 2002 | 25–14 | 64.1% | #13 | 1,977 | 14 | 64 | 1990 | 38–27 | 58.5% | #6 | 1,726 | 1 | 20 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1991 | 20–19 | 51.3% | #70 | 1,722 | 1 | 21 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1992 | 10–12 | 45.5% | #179 | 1,676 | 1 | 21 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1993 | 2–6 | 25.0% | #402 | 1,606 | 1 | 21 |