H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Sjeng Schalken vs Michael Stich H2H: 0-2
Michael Stich holds a 2–0 lead over Sjeng Schalken in their ATP head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Michael Stich leads 2–0 on grass. Most recently, Michael Stich won the 1996 Wimbledon first round 6-3 3-6 6-1 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.
NED
Age 49
Right-Handed
193 cm / 6'4"
H2H
0
–
2
2 main draw meetings
GER
Age 57
Right-Handed
193 cm / 6'4"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 26, 1996* | Wimbledon | Grand Slam | R128 | Grass | Michael Stich | 6-3 3-6 6-1 6-2 | Sjeng Schalken | Match data |
| Jun 23, 1995* | Halle | ATP 250 | R16 | Grass | Michael Stich | 4-6 6-4 6-2 | Sjeng Schalken | 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 |
| Michael Stich | #116 | #2 | 3,445 | 2,119 | 350 | 162 | 68.4% | 1 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 13 | 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 | Michael Stich | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 1996 | 26–26 | 50.0% | #65 | 1,687 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 1997 | 16–25 | 39.0% | #59 | 1,632 | 0 | 3 | 1989 | 11–12 | 47.8% | #100 | 1,586 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1998 | 22–30 | 42.3% | #66 | 1,592 | 0 | 3 | 1990 | 29–23 | 55.8% | #42 | 1,781 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 1999 | 28–26 | 51.9% | #44 | 1,744 | 0 | 4 | 1991 | 68–23 | 74.7% | #4 | 1,989 | 1 | 5 |
| 23 | 2000 | 35–26 | 57.4% | #22 | 1,824 | 0 | 5 | 1992 | 42–19 | 68.9% | #15 | 2,016 | 1 | 7 |
| 24 | 2001 | 36–27 | 57.1% | #26 | 1,846 | 0 | 6 | 1993 | 67–19 | 77.9% | #2 | 2,082 | 1 | 13 |
| 25 | 2002 | 36–27 | 57.1% | #20 | 1,839 | 0 | 7 | 1994 | 54–21 | 72.0% | #9 | 1,925 | 1 | 16 |
| 26 | 2003 | 39–23 | 62.9% | #18 | 1,826 | 0 | 9 | 1995 | 39–18 | 68.4% | #12 | 1,895 | 1 | 17 |
| 27 | 2004 | 17–18 | 48.6% | #57 | 1,698 | 0 | 9 | 1996 | 25–15 | 62.5% | #16 | 1,828 | 1 | 18 |
| 28 | 2005 | 7–10 | 41.2% | #230 | 1,664 | 0 | 9 | 1997 | 15–12 | 55.6% | #64 | 1,842 | 1 | 18 |