H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Ronald Agenor vs Tomas Smid H2H: 2-1
Ronald Agenor holds a 2–1 lead over Tomas Smid in their ATP head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Tomas Smid leads 1–0 on carpet, while Ronald Agenor leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Ronald Agenor won the 1987 Basel fourth round 7-5 2-6 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.
HAI
Age 61
Right-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H
2
–
1
3 main draw meetings
CZE
Age 70
Right-Handed
190 cm / 6'3"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 9, 1987* | Basel | ATP 250 | R16 | Hard | Ronald Agenor | 7-5 2-6 6-3 | Tomas Smid | Match data |
| Jul 10, 1987* | Gstaad | ATP 250 | R16 | Clay | Ronald Agenor | 6-2 6-3 | Tomas Smid | Match data |
| Jan 30, 1986* | Philadelphia | ATP 250 | R32 | Carpet | Tomas Smid | 6-4 3-6 6-3 | Ronald Agenor | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ronald Agenor | #1,507 | #22 | 984 | 1,895 | 215 | 251 | 46.1% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
| Tomas Smid | #975 | #11 | 28 | 1,998 | 497 | 318 | 61.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 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 | Ronald Agenor | Tomas Smid | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 19 | 1984 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #418 | 1,480 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 1985 | 17–14 | 54.8% | #49 | 1,657 | 0 | 0 | 1976 | 5–7 | 41.7% | #154 | 1,542 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1986 | 20–22 | 47.6% | #74 | 1,672 | 0 | 0 | 1977 | 16–18 | 47.1% | #67 | 1,637 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1987 | 25–20 | 55.6% | #44 | 1,736 | 0 | 0 | 1978 | 36–25 | 59.0% | #36 | 1,799 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 1988 | 24–17 | 58.5% | #28 | 1,776 | 0 | 0 | 1979 | 50–25 | 66.7% | #27 | 1,870 | 0 | 2 |
| 24 | 1989 | 24–17 | 58.5% | #37 | 1,768 | 0 | 1 | 1980 | 45–21 | 68.2% | #23 | 1,950 | 0 | 4 |
| 25 | 1990 | 33–25 | 56.9% | #29 | 1,815 | 0 | 3 | 1981 | 54–28 | 65.9% | #28 | 1,864 | 0 | 5 |
| 26 | 1991 | 16–27 | 37.2% | #74 | 1,643 | 0 | 3 | 1982 | 62–28 | 68.9% | #24 | 1,901 | 0 | 7 |
| 27 | 1992 | 5–16 | 23.8% | #132 | 1,538 | 0 | 3 | 1983 | 59–30 | 66.3% | #17 | 1,902 | 0 | 9 |
| 28 | 1993 | 17–25 | 40.5% | #58 | 1,600 | 0 | 3 | 1984 | 46–27 | 63.0% | #16 | 1,840 | 0 | 9 |
| 29 | 1994 | 15–23 | 39.5% | #71 | 1,578 | 0 | 3 | 1985 | 47–27 | 63.5% | #19 | 1,804 | 0 | 10 |
| 30 | 1995 | 8–12 | 40.0% | #146 | 1,585 | 0 | 3 | 1986 | 28–24 | 53.8% | #54 | 1,721 | 0 | 10 |
| 31 | 1996 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #326 | 1,528 | 0 | 3 | 1987 | 30–26 | 53.6% | #31 | 1,729 | 0 | 10 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1988 | 17–23 | 42.5% | #115 | 1,656 | 0 | 10 |
| 33 | 1998 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #237 | 1,533 | 0 | 3 | 1989 | 2–9 | 18.2% | #453 | 1,537 | 0 | 10 |
| 34 | 1999 | 3–7 | 30.0% | #96 | 1,522 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 35 | 2000 | 6–16 | 27.3% | #137 | 1,430 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 36 | 2001 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #188 | 1,466 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |