H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Sjeng Schalken vs Wayne Black H2H: 2-0
Sjeng Schalken holds a 2–0 lead over Wayne Black in their ATP head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Sjeng Schalken leads 2–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Sjeng Schalken won the 2002 Canada Masters second round 6-3 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
2
–
0
2 main draw meetings
ZIM
Age 52
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 31, 2002* | Canada Masters | Masters 1000 | R64 | Hard | Sjeng Schalken | 6-3 6-3 | Wayne Black | Match data |
| Apr 14, 1999* | Tokyo | ATP 250 | R64 | Hard | Sjeng Schalken | 6-4 6-1 | Wayne Black | 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 |
| Wayne Black | #1,469 | #69 | 646 | 1,721 | 52 | 81 | 39.1% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
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 | Wayne Black | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1993 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #719 | 1,494 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1997 | 16–25 | 39.0% | #59 | 1,632 | 0 | 3 | 1994 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #360 | 1,520 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1998 | 22–30 | 42.3% | #66 | 1,592 | 0 | 3 | 1995 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #194 | 1,519 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1999 | 28–26 | 51.9% | #44 | 1,744 | 0 | 4 | 1996 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #252 | 1,510 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2000 | 35–26 | 57.4% | #22 | 1,824 | 0 | 5 | 1997 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #99 | 1,553 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2001 | 36–27 | 57.1% | #26 | 1,846 | 0 | 6 | 1998 | 17–24 | 41.5% | #94 | 1,636 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2002 | 36–27 | 57.1% | #20 | 1,839 | 0 | 7 | 1999 | 9–15 | 37.5% | #151 | 1,563 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2003 | 39–23 | 62.9% | #18 | 1,826 | 0 | 9 | 2000 | 8–8 | 50.0% | #107 | 1,662 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2004 | 17–18 | 48.6% | #57 | 1,698 | 0 | 9 | 2001 | 5–9 | 35.7% | #160 | 1,637 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2005 | 7–10 | 41.2% | #230 | 1,664 | 0 | 9 | 2002 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #417 | 1,565 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2003 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #302 | 1,571 | 0 | 0 |