H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 01:16 UTC
Tim Henman vs Fernando Meligeni H2H: 1-1
Tim Henman and Fernando Meligeni are tied 1–1 in their ATP head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Fernando Meligeni leads 1–0 on clay, while Tim Henman leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Tim Henman won the 2001 US Open second round 6-3 6-4 3-6 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.
GBR
Age 51
Right-Handed
185 cm / 6'1"
H2H
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
BRA
Age 55
Left-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 31, 2001* | US Open | Grand Slam | R64 | Hard | Tim Henman | 6-3 6-4 3-6 6-4 | Fernando Meligeni | Match data |
| Apr 22, 1999* | Monte Carlo Masters | Masters 1000 | R32 | Clay | Fernando Meligeni | 6-7(5) 6-4 7-5 | Tim Henman | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tim Henman | #615 | #4 | 2,826 | 2,027 | 468 | 260 | 64.3% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 11 |
| Fernando Meligeni | #675 | #25 | 1,316 | 1,888 | 185 | 199 | 48.2% | 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 | Tim Henman | Fernando Meligeni | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 19 | 1994 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #167 | 1,513 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 1995 | 7–7 | 50.0% | #95 | 1,584 | 0 | 0 | 1991 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #206 | 1,514 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1996 | 37–24 | 60.7% | #29 | 1,821 | 0 | 0 | 1992 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #169 | 1,497 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1997 | 47–23 | 67.1% | #17 | 1,895 | 0 | 2 | 1993 | 6–7 | 46.2% | #99 | 1,554 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 1998 | 55–29 | 65.5% | #7 | 1,960 | 0 | 4 | 1994 | 14–19 | 42.4% | #91 | 1,599 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 1999 | 41–25 | 62.1% | #12 | 1,785 | 0 | 4 | 1995 | 22–18 | 55.0% | #64 | 1,696 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 2000 | 55–23 | 70.5% | #10 | 1,953 | 0 | 6 | 1996 | 13–16 | 44.8% | #94 | 1,651 | 0 | 2 |
| 26 | 2001 | 49–20 | 71.0% | #9 | 1,924 | 0 | 8 | 1997 | 24–19 | 55.8% | #67 | 1,710 | 0 | 2 |
| 27 | 2002 | 45–18 | 71.4% | #8 | 1,867 | 0 | 9 | 1998 | 18–20 | 47.4% | #57 | 1,655 | 0 | 3 |
| 28 | 2003 | 30–16 | 65.2% | #15 | 1,970 | 0 | 11 | 1999 | 27–26 | 50.9% | #29 | 1,685 | 0 | 3 |
| 29 | 2004 | 41–20 | 67.2% | #6 | 1,926 | 0 | 11 | 2000 | 14–21 | 40.0% | #100 | 1,622 | 0 | 3 |
| 30 | 2005 | 23–18 | 56.1% | #36 | 1,746 | 0 | 11 | 2001 | 17–16 | 51.5% | #71 | 1,709 | 0 | 3 |
| 31 | 2006 | 31–20 | 60.8% | #39 | 1,868 | 0 | 11 | 2002 | 19–23 | 45.2% | #74 | 1,651 | 0 | 3 |
| 32 | 2007 | 4–12 | 25.0% | #292 | 1,684 | 0 | 11 | 2003 | 6–8 | 42.9% | #210 | 1,638 | 0 | 3 |