H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 17:48 UTC
Sjeng Schalken vs Slava Dosedel H2H: 1-1
Sjeng Schalken and Slava Dosedel are tied 1–1 in their ATP head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Slava Dosedel leads 1–0 on clay, while Sjeng Schalken leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Slava Dosedel won the 1998 Prague third round 2-6 7-6(4) 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
CZE
Right-Handed
183 cm / 6'0"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 30, 1998* | Prague | ATP 250 | R32 | Clay | Slava Dosedel | 2-6 7-6(4) 6-1 | Sjeng Schalken | Match data |
| Aug 22, 1997* | Boston | ATP 250 | R16 | Hard | Sjeng Schalken | 2-6 6-1 7-5 | Slava Dosedel | 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 |
| Slava Dosedel | #1,027 | #26 | 1,122 | 1,825 | 190 | 184 | 50.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
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.
| Sjeng Schalken | Slava Dosedel | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles |
| 1994 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #148 | 1,501 | 0 | 0 | 1989 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #265 | 1,468 | 0 | 0 |
| 1995 | 17–14 | 54.8% | #69 | 1,645 | 0 | 1 | 1990 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #146 | 1,467 | 0 | 0 |
| 1996 | 26–26 | 50.0% | #65 | 1,687 | 0 | 2 | 1991 | 4–13 | 23.5% | #201 | 1,444 | 0 | 0 |
| 1997 | 16–25 | 39.0% | #59 | 1,632 | 0 | 3 | 1992 | 3–3 | 50.0% | #159 | 1,497 | 0 | 0 |
| 1998 | 22–30 | 42.3% | #66 | 1,592 | 0 | 3 | 1993 | 16–15 | 51.6% | #68 | 1,595 | 0 | 0 |
| 1999 | 28–26 | 51.9% | #44 | 1,744 | 0 | 4 | 1994 | 36–23 | 61.0% | #29 | 1,731 | 0 | 0 |
| 2000 | 35–26 | 57.4% | #22 | 1,824 | 0 | 5 | 1995 | 27–25 | 51.9% | #60 | 1,695 | 0 | 1 |
| 2001 | 36–27 | 57.1% | #26 | 1,846 | 0 | 6 | 1996 | 21–13 | 61.8% | #66 | 1,769 | 0 | 2 |
| 2002 | 36–27 | 57.1% | #20 | 1,839 | 0 | 7 | 1997 | 24–18 | 57.1% | #43 | 1,762 | 0 | 3 |
| 2003 | 39–23 | 62.9% | #18 | 1,826 | 0 | 9 | 1998 | 21–21 | 50.0% | #64 | 1,690 | 0 | 3 |
| 2004 | 17–18 | 48.6% | #57 | 1,698 | 0 | 9 | 1999 | 15–12 | 55.6% | #63 | 1,741 | 0 | 3 |
| 2005 | 7–10 | 41.2% | #230 | 1,664 | 0 | 9 | 2000 | 17–20 | 45.9% | #64 | 1,722 | 0 | 3 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2001 | 5–16 | 23.8% | #152 | 1,575 | 0 | 3 |