H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 19:16 UTC
Thomas Muster vs Daniel Vacek H2H: 1-2
Daniel Vacek holds a 2–1 lead over Thomas Muster in their ATP head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Daniel Vacek leads 1–0 on carpet, while Thomas Muster leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Daniel Vacek won the 1994 Moscow third round 6-2 7-5.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
AUT
Age 58
Left-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H
1
–
2
3 main draw meetings
CZE
Age 55
Right-Handed
190 cm / 6'3"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 10, 1994* | Moscow | ATP 250 | R32 | Carpet | Daniel Vacek | 6-2 7-5 | Thomas Muster | Match data |
| Jan 14, 1994* | Sydney Outdoor | ATP 250 | R16 | Hard | Daniel Vacek | 7-6(5) 5-7 6-4 | Thomas Muster | Match data |
| Jul 22, 1993* | Stuttgart Outdoor | ATP 250 | R32 | Clay | Thomas Muster | 6-4 3-6 7-6(3) | Daniel Vacek | 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 Muster | #1,092 | #1 | 4,474 | 2,161 | 590 | 267 | 68.8% | 1 | 8 | 0 | 0 | 35 | 44 |
| Daniel Vacek | #1,133 | #26 | 1,151 | 1,818 | 170 | 219 | 43.7% | 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.
| Age | Thomas Muster | Daniel Vacek | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | 1984 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #311 | 1,533 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 1985 | 9–8 | 52.9% | #98 | 1,611 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 1986 | 18–16 | 52.9% | #47 | 1,740 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 1987 | 22–16 | 57.9% | #56 | 1,753 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 1988 | 47–16 | 74.6% | #16 | 1,914 | 0 | 5 | 1991 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #470 | 1,490 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1989 | 18–10 | 64.3% | #21 | 1,877 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 22 | 1990 | 45–17 | 72.6% | #7 | 1,862 | 0 | 8 | 1993 | 13–22 | 37.1% | #114 | 1,560 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 1991 | 30–18 | 62.5% | #35 | 1,835 | 0 | 10 | 1994 | 25–27 | 48.1% | #45 | 1,711 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 1992 | 39–22 | 63.9% | #18 | 1,793 | 0 | 13 | 1995 | 30–31 | 49.2% | #27 | 1,794 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 1993 | 77–21 | 78.6% | #9 | 1,953 | 0 | 20 | 1996 | 22–28 | 44.0% | #71 | 1,694 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 1994 | 54–26 | 67.5% | #16 | 1,815 | 0 | 23 | 1997 | 19–26 | 42.2% | #53 | 1,669 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 1995 | 84–17 | 83.2% | #3 | 1,990 | 1 | 35 | 1998 | 25–29 | 46.3% | #50 | 1,672 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 1996 | 65–21 | 75.6% | #5 | 1,915 | 1 | 42 | 1999 | 29–31 | 48.3% | #43 | 1,744 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 1997 | 43–23 | 65.2% | #9 | 1,820 | 1 | 44 | 2000 | 4–13 | 23.5% | #238 | 1,630 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 1998 | 32–20 | 61.5% | #25 | 1,800 | 1 | 44 | 2001 | 2–7 | 22.2% | #393 | 1,595 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | 1999 | 5–11 | 31.2% | #189 | 1,674 | 1 | 44 | 2002 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #749 | 1,578 | 0 | 0 |
| 42 | 2010 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #980 | 1,655 | 1 | 44 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 43 | 2011 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #1075 | 1,608 | 1 | 44 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |