H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 07:16 UTC

Richard Gasquet vs Sam Querrey H2H: 3-1

Richard Gasquet holds a 3–1 lead over Sam Querrey in their ATP head-to-head. Across 4 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on clay, while Richard Gasquet leads 2–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Richard Gasquet won the 2017 Tokyo third round 6-4 7-6(2).

Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.

Richard Gasquet
France Age 40 Right-Handed 183 cm / 6'0"
H2H
3 – 1
4 main draw meetings
Sam Querrey
USA Age 38 Right-Handed 198 cm / 6'6"

H2H Match Log

DateTournamentCategoryRoundSurfaceWinnerScoreLoserMatch
Oct 5, 2017* Tokyo ATP 500 R32 Hard Richard Gasquet #30 6-4 7-6(2) Sam Querrey #15 Match data
Oct 6, 2016* Beijing ATP 500 R32 Hard Richard Gasquet #17 2-6 6-3 6-2 Sam Querrey #29 Match data
May 14, 2013* Rome Masters Masters 1000 R64 Clay Richard Gasquet #9 6-2 7-6(8) Sam Querrey #19 Match data
Apr 25, 2008* Monte Carlo Masters Masters 1000 R16 Clay Sam Querrey #50 2-6 6-4 6-3 Richard Gasquet #9 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
Richard Gasquet #448 #7 3,365 2,165 596 406 59.5% 0 0 0 0 16 16
Sam Querrey #529 #11 2,595 2,037 372 315 54.1% 0 0 0 2 8 10

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 Richard Gasquet Sam Querrey
YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles
16 2002 1–5 16.7% #161 1,486 0 0 — — — — — — —
17 2003 2–8 20.0% #93 1,463 0 0 — — — — — — —
18 2004 13–15 46.4% #107 1,597 0 0 2006 6–11 35.3% #130 1,540 0 0
19 2005 30–10 75.0% #16 1,851 0 1 2007 19–22 46.3% #63 1,636 0 0
20 2006 33–20 62.3% #18 1,922 0 4 2008 28–23 54.9% #39 1,786 0 1
21 2007 47–24 66.2% #8 1,920 0 5 2009 39–22 63.9% #25 1,899 0 2
22 2008 31–21 59.6% #25 1,869 0 5 2010 35–21 62.5% #18 1,872 0 6
23 2009 23–15 60.5% #52 1,855 0 5 2011 12–13 48.0% #93 1,816 0 6
24 2010 38–24 61.3% #30 1,892 0 6 2012 37–24 60.7% #22 2,005 0 7
25 2011 34–18 65.4% #19 1,984 0 6 2013 25–21 54.3% #46 1,877 0 7
26 2012 41–21 66.1% #10 2,002 0 7 2014 26–20 56.5% #35 1,893 0 7
27 2013 48–23 67.6% #9 2,046 0 10 2015 20–24 45.5% #59 1,810 0 7
28 2014 29–19 60.4% #26 1,935 0 10 2016 28–23 54.9% #31 1,798 0 8
29 2015 43–17 71.7% #9 2,127 0 12 2017 35–20 63.6% #13 1,943 0 10
30 2016 33–17 66.0% #18 1,998 0 14 2018 21–22 48.8% #51 1,822 0 10
31 2017 28–18 60.9% #31 1,956 0 14 2019 24–17 58.5% #44 1,898 0 10
32 2018 34–23 59.6% #26 1,933 0 15 2020 3–6 33.3% #53 1,817 0 10
33 2019 17–18 48.6% #61 1,844 0 15 2021 10–16 38.5% #108 1,702 0 10
34 2020 10–10 50.0% #47 1,823 0 15 2022 4–10 28.6% #329 1,649 0 10
35 2021 14–17 45.2% #87 1,772 0 15 — — — — — — —
36 2022 24–19 55.8% #68 1,860 0 15 — — — — — — —
37 2023 15–25 37.5% #76 1,628 0 16 — — — — — — —
38 2024 4–14 22.2% #129 1,620 0 16 — — — — — — —
39 2025 4–5 44.4% #313 1,636 0 16 — — — — — — —