H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 07:16 UTC
Taro Daniel vs Michal Przysiezny H2H: 1-0
Taro Daniel holds a 1–0 lead over Michal Przysiezny in their ATP head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Taro Daniel leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Taro Daniel won the 2015 Valencia third round 4-6 7-6(2) 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.
Japan
Age 33
Right-Handed
191 cm / 6'3"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
POL
Right-Handed
185 cm / 6'1"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 29, 2015* | Valencia | ATP 250 | R32 | Hard | Taro Daniel | 4-6 7-6(2) 6-3 | Michal Przysiezny | 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 |
| Michal Przysiezny | #1,345 | #57 | 810 | 1,784 | 19 | 58 | 24.7% | 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.
| Taro Daniel | Michal Przysiezny | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles |
| 2014 | 2–5 | 28.6% | #177 | 1,645 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #339 | 1,478 | 0 | 0 |
| 2015 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #96 | 1,705 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #257 | 1,507 | 0 | 0 |
| 2016 | 6–14 | 30.0% | #127 | 1,670 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #256 | 1,540 | 0 | 0 |
| 2017 | 4–9 | 30.8% | #99 | 1,641 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #609 | 1,514 | 0 | 0 |
| 2018 | 16–17 | 48.5% | #77 | 1,710 | 0 | 1 | 2009 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #183 | 1,516 | 0 | 0 |
| 2019 | 11–18 | 37.9% | #110 | 1,655 | 0 | 1 | 2010 | 1–12 | 7.7% | #86 | 1,438 | 0 | 0 |
| 2020 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #117 | 1,595 | 0 | 1 | 2011 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #306 | 1,444 | 0 | 0 |
| 2021 | 5–10 | 33.3% | #125 | 1,613 | 0 | 1 | 2013 | 10–11 | 47.6% | #66 | 1,776 | 0 | 0 |
| 2022 | 12–18 | 40.0% | #92 | 1,691 | 0 | 1 | 2014 | 4–17 | 19.0% | #174 | 1,669 | 0 | 0 |
| 2023 | 11–16 | 40.7% | #75 | 1,687 | 0 | 1 | 2015 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #193 | 1,671 | 0 | 0 |
| 2024 | 10–23 | 30.3% | #84 | 1,631 | 0 | 1 | 2016 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #428 | 1,658 | 0 | 0 |
| 2025 | 2–6 | 25.0% | #376 | 1,503 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2026 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #194 | 1,521 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |