H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Sjeng Schalken vs Marcelo Rios H2H: 2-0
Sjeng Schalken holds a 2–0 lead over Marcelo Rios in their ATP head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Sjeng Schalken leads 2–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Sjeng Schalken won the 1999 Boston quarterfinal 7-5 6-0.
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 49
Right-Handed
193 cm / 6'4"
H2H
2
–
0
2 main draw meetings
CHI
Age 50
Left-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 28, 1999* | Boston | ATP 250 | QF | Hard | Sjeng Schalken | 7-5 6-0 | Marcelo Rios | Match data |
| Aug 24, 1997* | Boston | ATP 250 | F | Hard | Sjeng Schalken | 7-5 6-3 | Marcelo Rios | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sjeng Schalken | #677 | #11 | 1,790 | 1,934 | 280 | 254 | 52.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 9 | 9 |
| Marcelo Rios | #994 | #1 | 3,719 | 2,137 | 366 | 179 | 67.2% | 0 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 12 | 18 |
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 | Sjeng Schalken | Marcelo Rios | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 1994 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #148 | 1,501 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 1995 | 17–14 | 54.8% | #69 | 1,645 | 0 | 1 | 1994 | 12–11 | 52.2% | #107 | 1,615 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1996 | 26–26 | 50.0% | #65 | 1,687 | 0 | 2 | 1995 | 38–20 | 65.5% | #25 | 1,769 | 0 | 3 |
| 20 | 1997 | 16–25 | 39.0% | #59 | 1,632 | 0 | 3 | 1996 | 52–25 | 67.5% | #11 | 1,835 | 0 | 4 |
| 21 | 1998 | 22–30 | 42.3% | #66 | 1,592 | 0 | 3 | 1997 | 54–26 | 67.5% | #10 | 1,868 | 0 | 5 |
| 22 | 1999 | 28–26 | 51.9% | #44 | 1,744 | 0 | 4 | 1998 | 66–18 | 78.6% | #2 | 1,948 | 0 | 12 |
| 23 | 2000 | 35–26 | 57.4% | #22 | 1,824 | 0 | 5 | 1999 | 45–16 | 73.8% | #9 | 1,916 | 0 | 15 |
| 24 | 2001 | 36–27 | 57.1% | #26 | 1,846 | 0 | 6 | 2000 | 28–19 | 59.6% | #37 | 1,813 | 0 | 16 |
| 25 | 2002 | 36–27 | 57.1% | #20 | 1,839 | 0 | 7 | 2001 | 28–19 | 59.6% | #39 | 1,836 | 0 | 18 |
| 26 | 2003 | 39–23 | 62.9% | #18 | 1,826 | 0 | 9 | 2002 | 31–19 | 62.0% | #24 | 1,820 | 0 | 18 |
| 27 | 2004 | 17–18 | 48.6% | #57 | 1,698 | 0 | 9 | 2003 | 12–6 | 66.7% | #105 | 1,809 | 0 | 18 |
| 28 | 2005 | 7–10 | 41.2% | #230 | 1,664 | 0 | 9 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |