H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 13:16 UTC
Sjeng Schalken vs Rajeev Ram H2H: 0-1
Rajeev Ram holds a 1–0 lead over Sjeng Schalken in their ATP head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Rajeev Ram leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Rajeev Ram won the 2005 Indianapolis second round 7-5 7-6(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
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
USA
Age 42
Right-Handed
193 cm / 6'4"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 18, 2005 | Indianapolis | ATP 250 | R64 | Hard | Rajeev Ram | 7-5 7-6(1) | Sjeng Schalken | Match data |
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 |
| Rajeev Ram | #1,076 | #56 | 826 | 1,747 | 57 | 94 | 37.7% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
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 | Rajeev Ram | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 2002 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #536 | 1,479 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1996 | 26–26 | 50.0% | #65 | 1,687 | 0 | 2 | 2003 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #437 | 1,492 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1997 | 16–25 | 39.0% | #59 | 1,632 | 0 | 3 | 2004 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #297 | 1,474 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1998 | 22–30 | 42.3% | #66 | 1,592 | 0 | 3 | 2005 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #195 | 1,490 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1999 | 28–26 | 51.9% | #44 | 1,744 | 0 | 4 | 2006 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #197 | 1,457 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2000 | 35–26 | 57.4% | #22 | 1,824 | 0 | 5 | 2007 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #253 | 1,417 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2001 | 36–27 | 57.1% | #26 | 1,846 | 0 | 6 | 2008 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #190 | 1,479 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2002 | 36–27 | 57.1% | #20 | 1,839 | 0 | 7 | 2009 | 8–6 | 57.1% | #79 | 1,579 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2003 | 39–23 | 62.9% | #18 | 1,826 | 0 | 9 | 2010 | 6–18 | 25.0% | #184 | 1,590 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2004 | 17–18 | 48.6% | #57 | 1,698 | 0 | 9 | 2011 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #149 | 1,605 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2005 | 7–10 | 41.2% | #230 | 1,664 | 0 | 9 | 2012 | 7–9 | 43.8% | #132 | 1,635 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2013 | 4–11 | 26.7% | #127 | 1,646 | 0 | 1 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2014 | 3–7 | 30.0% | #139 | 1,660 | 0 | 1 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2015 | 7–6 | 53.8% | #89 | 1,654 | 0 | 2 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2016 | 12–19 | 38.7% | #129 | 1,615 | 0 | 2 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2017 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #353 | 1,582 | 0 | 2 |