H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Sjeng Schalken vs Mikael Tillstrom H2H: 1-1
Sjeng Schalken and Mikael Tillstrom are tied 1–1 in their ATP head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on hard courts. Most recently, Mikael Tillstrom won the 1996 New Haven second round 6-3 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.
NED
Age 49
Right-Handed
193 cm / 6'4"
H2H
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
SWE
Age 54
Right-Handed
185 cm / 6'1"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 14, 1996* | New Haven | ATP 250 | R64 | Hard | Mikael Tillstrom | 6-3 6-1 | Sjeng Schalken | Match data |
| Jan 13, 1996* | Jakarta | ATP 250 | QF | Hard | Sjeng Schalken | 5-7 6-2 6-4 | Mikael Tillstrom | 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 |
| Mikael Tillstrom | #506 | #39 | 966 | 1,831 | 107 | 108 | 49.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
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 | Mikael Tillstrom | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1992 | 7–4 | 63.6% | #141 | 1,610 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1998 | 22–30 | 42.3% | #66 | 1,592 | 0 | 3 | 1993 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #438 | 1,564 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1999 | 28–26 | 51.9% | #44 | 1,744 | 0 | 4 | 1994 | 4–2 | 66.7% | #149 | 1,658 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2000 | 35–26 | 57.4% | #22 | 1,824 | 0 | 5 | 1995 | 4–3 | 57.1% | #116 | 1,699 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2001 | 36–27 | 57.1% | #26 | 1,846 | 0 | 6 | 1996 | 24–19 | 55.8% | #47 | 1,757 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2002 | 36–27 | 57.1% | #20 | 1,839 | 0 | 7 | 1997 | 18–22 | 45.0% | #68 | 1,646 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2003 | 39–23 | 62.9% | #18 | 1,826 | 0 | 9 | 1998 | 20–21 | 48.8% | #85 | 1,645 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2004 | 17–18 | 48.6% | #57 | 1,698 | 0 | 9 | 1999 | 15–18 | 45.5% | #79 | 1,686 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2005 | 7–10 | 41.2% | #230 | 1,664 | 0 | 9 | 2000 | 15–16 | 48.4% | #80 | 1,657 | 0 | 1 |