H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Sjeng Schalken vs Todd Woodbridge H2H: 1-1
Sjeng Schalken and Todd Woodbridge are tied 1–1 in their ATP head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Sjeng Schalken leads 1–0 on carpet, while Todd Woodbridge leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Todd Woodbridge won the 1999 Singapore third round 4-6 7-5 6-3.
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
AUS
Age 55
Right-Handed
178 cm / 5'10"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 14, 1999* | Singapore | ATP 250 | R32 | Hard | Todd Woodbridge | 4-6 7-5 6-3 | Sjeng Schalken | Match data |
| Oct 16, 1998* | Singapore | ATP 250 | R16 | Carpet | Sjeng Schalken | 7-6(3) 6-4 | Todd Woodbridge | 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 |
| Todd Woodbridge | #1,151 | #19 | 1,575 | 1,857 | 237 | 229 | 50.9% | 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 | Todd Woodbridge | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1988 | 1–6 | 14.3% | #213 | 1,453 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 1995 | 17–14 | 54.8% | #69 | 1,645 | 0 | 1 | 1989 | 6–6 | 50.0% | #131 | 1,573 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1996 | 26–26 | 50.0% | #65 | 1,687 | 0 | 2 | 1990 | 16–17 | 48.5% | #50 | 1,704 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1997 | 16–25 | 39.0% | #59 | 1,632 | 0 | 3 | 1991 | 23–25 | 47.9% | #77 | 1,702 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1998 | 22–30 | 42.3% | #66 | 1,592 | 0 | 3 | 1992 | 25–22 | 53.2% | #54 | 1,684 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1999 | 28–26 | 51.9% | #44 | 1,744 | 0 | 4 | 1993 | 19–20 | 48.7% | #109 | 1,664 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2000 | 35–26 | 57.4% | #22 | 1,824 | 0 | 5 | 1994 | 15–19 | 44.1% | #90 | 1,661 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2001 | 36–27 | 57.1% | #26 | 1,846 | 0 | 6 | 1995 | 32–22 | 59.3% | #33 | 1,810 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 2002 | 36–27 | 57.1% | #20 | 1,839 | 0 | 7 | 1996 | 32–23 | 58.2% | #36 | 1,744 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2003 | 39–23 | 62.9% | #18 | 1,826 | 0 | 9 | 1997 | 31–20 | 60.8% | #26 | 1,796 | 0 | 2 |
| 27 | 2004 | 17–18 | 48.6% | #57 | 1,698 | 0 | 9 | 1998 | 21–21 | 50.0% | #65 | 1,714 | 0 | 2 |
| 28 | 2005 | 7–10 | 41.2% | #230 | 1,664 | 0 | 9 | 1999 | 8–16 | 33.3% | #197 | 1,601 | 0 | 2 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2000 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #187 | 1,588 | 0 | 2 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2001 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #207 | 1,596 | 0 | 2 |