H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Thomas Enqvist vs Thomas Muster H2H: 1-3
Thomas Muster holds a 3–1 lead over Thomas Enqvist in their ATP head-to-head. Across 4 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on carpet, while Thomas Muster leads 2–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Thomas Muster won the 1996 US Open fourth round 7-6(4) 6-2 4-6 6-1.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
SWE
Age 52
Right-Handed
190 cm / 6'3"
H2H
1
–
3
4 main draw meetings
AUT
Age 58
Left-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 4, 1996* | US Open | Grand Slam | R16 | Hard | Thomas Muster | 7-6(4) 6-2 4-6 6-1 | Thomas Enqvist | Match data |
| Nov 14, 1995 | Tour Finals | ATP Finals | RR | Carpet | Thomas Enqvist | 6-4 6-7(3) 6-4 | Thomas Muster | Match data |
| Sep 4, 1994* | US Open | Grand Slam | R32 | Hard | Thomas Muster | 6-0 6-4 6-2 | Thomas Enqvist | Match data |
| Oct 23, 1993* | Vienna | ATP 250 | SF | Carpet | Thomas Muster | 6-2 6-4 | Thomas Enqvist | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thomas Enqvist | #548 | #4 | 2,693 | 2,013 | 422 | 281 | 60.0% | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 16 | 19 |
| Thomas Muster | #1,092 | #1 | 4,474 | 2,161 | 590 | 267 | 68.8% | 1 | 8 | 0 | 0 | 35 | 44 |
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 | Thomas Enqvist | Thomas Muster | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 15 | 1989 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #1103 | 1,484 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 16 | 1990 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #472 | 1,480 | 0 | 0 | 1984 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #311 | 1,533 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 1991 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #231 | 1,467 | 0 | 0 | 1985 | 9–8 | 52.9% | #98 | 1,611 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 1992 | 16–9 | 64.0% | #63 | 1,734 | 0 | 1 | 1986 | 18–16 | 52.9% | #47 | 1,740 | 0 | 1 |
| 19 | 1993 | 18–23 | 43.9% | #88 | 1,712 | 0 | 2 | 1987 | 22–16 | 57.9% | #56 | 1,753 | 0 | 1 |
| 20 | 1994 | 23–19 | 54.8% | #59 | 1,761 | 0 | 2 | 1988 | 47–16 | 74.6% | #16 | 1,914 | 0 | 5 |
| 21 | 1995 | 63–22 | 74.1% | #7 | 1,982 | 0 | 7 | 1989 | 18–10 | 64.3% | #21 | 1,877 | 0 | 5 |
| 22 | 1996 | 49–25 | 66.2% | #9 | 1,980 | 0 | 10 | 1990 | 45–17 | 72.6% | #7 | 1,862 | 0 | 8 |
| 23 | 1997 | 35–21 | 62.5% | #28 | 1,873 | 0 | 11 | 1991 | 30–18 | 62.5% | #35 | 1,835 | 0 | 10 |
| 24 | 1998 | 35–15 | 70.0% | #22 | 1,869 | 0 | 13 | 1992 | 39–22 | 63.9% | #18 | 1,793 | 0 | 13 |
| 25 | 1999 | 45–25 | 64.3% | #4 | 1,913 | 0 | 16 | 1993 | 77–21 | 78.6% | #9 | 1,953 | 0 | 20 |
| 26 | 2000 | 51–23 | 68.9% | #9 | 1,906 | 0 | 18 | 1994 | 54–26 | 67.5% | #16 | 1,815 | 0 | 23 |
| 27 | 2001 | 31–21 | 59.6% | #24 | 1,848 | 0 | 18 | 1995 | 84–17 | 83.2% | #3 | 1,990 | 1 | 35 |
| 28 | 2002 | 23–17 | 57.5% | #44 | 1,792 | 0 | 19 | 1996 | 65–21 | 75.6% | #5 | 1,915 | 1 | 42 |
| 29 | 2003 | 13–23 | 36.1% | #96 | 1,710 | 0 | 19 | 1997 | 43–23 | 65.2% | #9 | 1,820 | 1 | 44 |
| 30 | 2004 | 12–19 | 38.7% | #72 | 1,627 | 0 | 19 | 1998 | 32–20 | 61.5% | #25 | 1,800 | 1 | 44 |
| 31 | 2005 | 7–12 | 36.8% | #133 | 1,589 | 0 | 19 | 1999 | 5–11 | 31.2% | #189 | 1,674 | 1 | 44 |
| 42 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2010 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #980 | 1,655 | 1 | 44 |
| 43 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2011 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #1075 | 1,608 | 1 | 44 |