H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 19:16 UTC
Thiemo de Bakker vs Daniel Brands H2H: 0-1
Daniel Brands holds a 1–0 lead over Thiemo de Bakker in their ATP head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Daniel Brands leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Daniel Brands won the 2010 Bangkok fourth round 7-6(2) 1-6 7-6(7).
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 37
Right-Handed
193 cm / 6'4"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
GER
Age 39
Right-Handed
196 cm / 6'5"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 14, 2013 | Monte Carlo Masters | Masters 1000 | Q2 | Clay | Daniel Brands | 4-6 7-6(0) 6-4 | Thiemo de Bakker | Match data |
| Aug 27, 2012 | US Open | Grand Slam | Q1 | Hard | Daniel Brands | 4-6 6-3 6-4 | Thiemo de Bakker | Match data |
| Oct 1, 2010* | Bangkok | ATP 250 | R16 | Hard | Daniel Brands | 7-6(2) 1-6 7-6(7) | Thiemo de Bakker | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thiemo de Bakker | #1,382 | #40 | 1,010 | 1,853 | 54 | 80 | 40.3% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Daniel Brands | #1,055 | #51 | 896 | 1,886 | 57 | 92 | 38.3% | 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 | Thiemo de Bakker | Daniel Brands | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 2006 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #464 | 1,512 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 2007 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #444 | 1,502 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 2008 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #249 | 1,531 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #220 | 1,491 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2009 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #96 | 1,610 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #150 | 1,539 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2010 | 26–23 | 53.1% | #43 | 1,762 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 7–5 | 58.3% | #92 | 1,645 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2011 | 2–11 | 15.4% | #223 | 1,664 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 9–19 | 32.1% | #104 | 1,670 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2012 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #124 | 1,641 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 4–11 | 26.7% | #110 | 1,690 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2013 | 7–10 | 41.2% | #146 | 1,682 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 5–8 | 38.5% | #153 | 1,689 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2014 | 7–6 | 53.8% | #144 | 1,680 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 22–22 | 50.0% | #54 | 1,815 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2015 | 2–5 | 28.6% | #99 | 1,621 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 2–11 | 15.4% | #329 | 1,713 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2016 | 5–12 | 29.4% | #257 | 1,583 | 0 | 0 | 2015 | 2–1 | 66.7% | #159 | 1,729 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2016 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #168 | 1,660 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2018 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #242 | 1,559 | 0 | 0 | 2017 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #320 | 1,662 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2019 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #511 | 1,537 | 0 | 0 | 2018 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #182 | 1,615 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2019 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #465 | 1,604 | 0 | 0 |