H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Roscoe Tanner vs Jim Delaney H2H: 4-0
Roscoe Tanner holds a 4–0 lead over Jim Delaney in their ATP head-to-head. Across 4 main-draw meetings, Roscoe Tanner leads 3–0 on hard courts and 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Roscoe Tanner won the 1979 Hong Kong third round 6-0 6-1.
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 74
Left-Handed
183 cm / 6'0"
H2H
4
–
0
4 main draw meetings
USA
Age 73
Right-Handed
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 8, 1979* | Hong Kong | ATP 250 | R32 | Hard | Roscoe Tanner | 6-0 6-1 | Jim Delaney | Match data |
| Feb 18, 1977* | San Jose | ATP 250 | R16 | Hard | Roscoe Tanner | 7-5 4-6 6-4 | Jim Delaney | Match data |
| Oct 28, 1976* | Perth | ATP 250 | R32 | Hard | Roscoe Tanner | 6-1 6-4 | Jim Delaney | Match data |
| Sep 5, 1976* | US Open | Grand Slam | R64 | Clay | Roscoe Tanner | 7-6 7-6 | Jim Delaney | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Roscoe Tanner | #789 | #4 | 0 | 2,158 | 595 | 298 | 66.6% | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 15 | 17 |
| Jim Delaney | #262 | #59 | 0 | 1,676 | 78 | 131 | 37.3% | 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.
| Age | Roscoe Tanner | Jim Delaney | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 1969 | 0–2 | 0.0% | — | 1,479 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 1970 | 0–9 | 0.0% | — | 1,417 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 1971 | 16–10 | 61.5% | — | 1,703 | 0 | 0 | 1972 | 1–5 | 16.7% | — | 1,453 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1972 | 29–14 | 67.4% | — | 1,911 | 0 | 0 | 1973 | 4–5 | 44.4% | #159 | 1,536 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1973 | 45–30 | 60.0% | #24 | 1,812 | 0 | 0 | 1974 | 9–7 | 56.2% | #109 | 1,590 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1974 | 66–28 | 70.2% | #14 | 1,959 | 0 | 2 | 1975 | 10–14 | 41.7% | #73 | 1,645 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 1975 | 65–24 | 73.0% | #9 | 1,965 | 0 | 5 | 1976 | 20–29 | 40.8% | #64 | 1,631 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 1976 | 70–28 | 71.4% | #11 | 2,012 | 0 | 9 | 1977 | 16–27 | 37.2% | #133 | 1,623 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 1977 | 52–30 | 63.4% | #15 | 1,880 | 1 | 11 | 1978 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #418 | 1,600 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 1978 | 59–24 | 71.1% | #11 | 1,935 | 1 | 13 | 1979 | 2–9 | 18.2% | #276 | 1,519 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 1979 | 61–19 | 76.2% | #5 | 2,025 | 1 | 15 | 1980 | 2–5 | 28.6% | #269 | 1,511 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 1980 | 42–16 | 72.4% | #13 | 1,993 | 1 | 16 | 1981 | 11–21 | 34.4% | #269 | 1,512 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 1981 | 51–22 | 69.9% | #12 | 1,901 | 1 | 17 | 1982 | 3–7 | 30.0% | #143 | 1,512 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 1982 | 20–17 | 54.1% | #43 | 1,779 | 1 | 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 1983 | 16–13 | 55.2% | #36 | 1,872 | 1 | 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 1984 | 3–11 | 21.4% | #249 | 1,679 | 1 | 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 1985 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #794 | 1,661 | 1 | 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |