H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 01:16 UTC
Thomas Johansson vs David Prinosil H2H: 1-3
David Prinosil holds a 3–1 lead over Thomas Johansson in their ATP head-to-head. Across 4 main-draw meetings, David Prinosil leads 1–0 on carpet, while Thomas Johansson leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Thomas Johansson won the 2001 Hamburg Masters second round 6-4 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.
SWE
Age 51
Right-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H
1
–
3
4 main draw meetings
GER
Age 53
Right-Handed
185 cm / 6'1"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 16, 2001* | Hamburg Masters | Masters 1000 | R64 | Clay | Thomas Johansson | 6-4 6-4 | David Prinosil | Match data |
| Jun 15, 2000* | Halle | ATP 250 | R32 | Grass | David Prinosil | 7-5 6-1 | Thomas Johansson | Match data |
| Apr 16, 1998* | Tokyo | ATP 250 | R32 | Hard | David Prinosil | 6-3 6-3 | Thomas Johansson | Match data |
| Mar 13, 1998* | Copenhagen | ATP 250 | R16 | Carpet | David Prinosil | 3-6 6-4 6-4 | Thomas Johansson | 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 Johansson | #586 | #7 | 2,365 | 1,969 | 336 | 277 | 54.8% | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 9 |
| David Prinosil | #1,091 | #28 | 1,040 | 1,800 | 165 | 208 | 44.2% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
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 Johansson | David Prinosil | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 18 | 1993 | 2–1 | 66.7% | #422 | 1,535 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 1994 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #486 | 1,496 | 0 | 0 | 1992 | 9–9 | 50.0% | #125 | 1,584 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1995 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #117 | 1,492 | 0 | 0 | 1993 | 16–25 | 39.0% | #77 | 1,633 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1996 | 28–21 | 57.1% | #60 | 1,763 | 0 | 0 | 1994 | 8–13 | 38.1% | #130 | 1,630 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1997 | 32–27 | 54.2% | #39 | 1,699 | 0 | 2 | 1995 | 19–18 | 51.4% | #50 | 1,708 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 1998 | 46–30 | 60.5% | #17 | 1,899 | 0 | 2 | 1996 | 24–23 | 51.1% | #39 | 1,779 | 0 | 2 |
| 24 | 1999 | 21–23 | 47.7% | #39 | 1,725 | 0 | 3 | 1997 | 16–26 | 38.1% | #89 | 1,633 | 0 | 2 |
| 25 | 2000 | 22–25 | 46.8% | #39 | 1,825 | 0 | 4 | 1998 | 20–25 | 44.4% | #78 | 1,622 | 0 | 2 |
| 26 | 2001 | 42–23 | 64.6% | #18 | 1,875 | 0 | 6 | 1999 | 22–23 | 48.9% | #66 | 1,672 | 0 | 2 |
| 27 | 2002 | 26–22 | 54.2% | #14 | 1,746 | 1 | 7 | 2000 | 22–17 | 56.4% | #38 | 1,788 | 0 | 3 |
| 28 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2001 | 7–22 | 24.1% | #132 | 1,606 | 0 | 3 |
| 29 | 2004 | 29–20 | 59.2% | #30 | 1,855 | 1 | 8 | 2002 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #229 | 1,593 | 0 | 3 |
| 30 | 2005 | 42–24 | 63.6% | #13 | 1,892 | 1 | 9 | 2003 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #276 | 1,521 | 0 | 3 |
| 31 | 2006 | 11–16 | 40.7% | #71 | 1,723 | 1 | 9 | 2004 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #1063 | 1,515 | 0 | 3 |
| 32 | 2007 | 23–23 | 50.0% | #62 | 1,759 | 1 | 9 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 2008 | 11–17 | 39.3% | #136 | 1,673 | 1 | 9 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |