H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Taro Daniel vs Jeremy Chardy H2H: 1-0
Taro Daniel holds a 1–0 lead over Jeremy Chardy in their ATP head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Taro Daniel leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Taro Daniel won the 2018 Istanbul semifinal 6-3 4-6 6-4.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
Japan
Age 33
Right-Handed
191 cm / 6'3"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
FRA
Age 39
Right-Handed
188 cm / 6'2"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 5, 2018* | Istanbul | ATP 250 | SF | Clay | Taro Daniel | 6-3 4-6 6-4 | Jeremy Chardy | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Taro Daniel | #194 | #58 | 893 | 1,815 | 81 | 146 | 35.7% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Jeremy Chardy | #1,077 | #25 | 1,486 | 1,968 | 290 | 303 | 48.9% | 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 | Taro Daniel | Jeremy Chardy | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2006 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #261 | 1,547 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2007 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #192 | 1,563 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2014 | 2–5 | 28.6% | #177 | 1,645 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 10–9 | 52.6% | #75 | 1,680 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2015 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #96 | 1,705 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 34–28 | 54.8% | #32 | 1,780 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 2016 | 6–14 | 30.0% | #127 | 1,670 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 24–28 | 46.2% | #45 | 1,827 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 2017 | 4–9 | 30.8% | #99 | 1,641 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 8–18 | 30.8% | #103 | 1,728 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 2018 | 16–17 | 48.5% | #77 | 1,710 | 0 | 1 | 2012 | 24–20 | 54.5% | #32 | 1,822 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2019 | 11–18 | 37.9% | #110 | 1,655 | 0 | 1 | 2013 | 22–25 | 46.8% | #34 | 1,797 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2020 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #117 | 1,595 | 0 | 1 | 2014 | 33–27 | 55.0% | #29 | 1,859 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2021 | 5–10 | 33.3% | #125 | 1,613 | 0 | 1 | 2015 | 27–27 | 50.0% | #31 | 1,896 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 2022 | 12–18 | 40.0% | #92 | 1,691 | 0 | 1 | 2016 | 17–21 | 44.7% | #69 | 1,752 | 0 | 1 |
| 30 | 2023 | 11–16 | 40.7% | #75 | 1,687 | 0 | 1 | 2017 | 17–21 | 44.7% | #78 | 1,784 | 0 | 1 |
| 31 | 2024 | 10–23 | 30.3% | #84 | 1,631 | 0 | 1 | 2018 | 24–21 | 53.3% | #40 | 1,830 | 0 | 1 |
| 32 | 2025 | 2–6 | 25.0% | #376 | 1,503 | 0 | 1 | 2019 | 28–27 | 50.9% | #51 | 1,918 | 0 | 1 |
| 33 | 2026 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #194 | 1,521 | 0 | 1 | 2020 | 2–5 | 28.6% | #75 | 1,786 | 0 | 1 |
| 34 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2021 | 17–17 | 50.0% | #107 | 1,774 | 0 | 1 |
| 36 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2023 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #519 | 1,718 | 0 | 1 |