H2H data updated: 2026-07-14 19:16 UTC
Tim Henman vs M. Petchey H2H: 1-0
Tim Henman holds a 1–0 lead over M. Petchey in their ATP head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Tim Henman leads 1–0 on carpet. Most recently, Tim Henman won the 1996 Shanghai quarterfinal 6-1 7-6(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
–
0
1 main draw meetings
GBR
Age 55
Right-Handed
183 cm / 6'0"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 3, 1996* | Shanghai | ATP 250 | QF | Carpet | Tim Henman | 6-1 7-6(4) | M. Petchey | 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 |
| M. Petchey | #1,313 | #80 | 552 | 1,597 | 34 | 64 | 34.7% | 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 | Tim Henman | M. Petchey | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1987 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #954 | 1,489 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1988 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #382 | 1,467 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1989 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #307 | 1,465 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1994 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #167 | 1,513 | 0 | 0 | 1990 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #240 | 1,450 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1995 | 7–7 | 50.0% | #95 | 1,584 | 0 | 0 | 1991 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #255 | 1,461 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1996 | 37–24 | 60.7% | #29 | 1,821 | 0 | 0 | 1992 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #245 | 1,472 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1997 | 47–23 | 67.1% | #17 | 1,895 | 0 | 2 | 1993 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #121 | 1,473 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 1998 | 55–29 | 65.5% | #7 | 1,960 | 0 | 4 | 1994 | 15–22 | 40.5% | #120 | 1,519 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 1999 | 41–25 | 62.1% | #12 | 1,785 | 0 | 4 | 1995 | 7–15 | 31.8% | #149 | 1,464 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2000 | 55–23 | 70.5% | #10 | 1,953 | 0 | 6 | 1996 | 5–7 | 41.7% | #212 | 1,515 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2001 | 49–20 | 71.0% | #9 | 1,924 | 0 | 8 | 1997 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #159 | 1,549 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2002 | 45–18 | 71.4% | #8 | 1,867 | 0 | 9 | 1998 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #587 | 1,527 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2003 | 30–16 | 65.2% | #15 | 1,970 | 0 | 11 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 2004 | 41–20 | 67.2% | #6 | 1,926 | 0 | 11 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 2005 | 23–18 | 56.1% | #36 | 1,746 | 0 | 11 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 2006 | 31–20 | 60.8% | #39 | 1,868 | 0 | 11 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 2007 | 4–12 | 25.0% | #292 | 1,684 | 0 | 11 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |