H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 19:16 UTC
Tomas Berdych vs Daniel Brands H2H: 2-0
Tomas Berdych holds a 2–0 lead over Daniel Brands in their ATP head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Tomas Berdych leads 2–0 on grass. Most recently, Tomas Berdych won the 2013 Wimbledon second round 7-6(6) 6-4 6-2.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
CZE
Age 40
Right-Handed
196 cm / 6'5"
H2H
2
–
0
2 main draw meetings
GER
Age 39
Right-Handed
196 cm / 6'5"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 27, 2013* | Wimbledon | Grand Slam | R64 | Grass | Tomas Berdych | 7-6(6) 6-4 6-2 | Daniel Brands | Match data |
| Jun 29, 2010* | Wimbledon | Grand Slam | R16 | Grass | Tomas Berdych | 4-6 7-6(1) 7-5 6-3 | Daniel Brands | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tomas Berdych | #104 | #4 | 5,230 | 2,232 | 594 | 321 | 64.9% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 8 | 13 |
| Daniel Brands | #1,055 | #51 | 896 | 1,886 | 57 | 92 | 38.3% | 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 | Tomas Berdych | Daniel Brands | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 2003 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #113 | 1,525 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 2004 | 12–13 | 48.0% | #45 | 1,657 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 2005 | 31–26 | 54.4% | #24 | 1,866 | 0 | 2 | 2007 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #220 | 1,491 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2006 | 42–24 | 63.6% | #13 | 1,933 | 0 | 2 | 2008 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #150 | 1,539 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2007 | 42–21 | 66.7% | #14 | 1,913 | 0 | 3 | 2009 | 7–5 | 58.3% | #92 | 1,645 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2008 | 30–18 | 62.5% | #20 | 1,919 | 0 | 4 | 2010 | 9–19 | 32.1% | #104 | 1,670 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2009 | 33–24 | 57.9% | #20 | 1,885 | 0 | 5 | 2011 | 4–11 | 26.7% | #110 | 1,690 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2010 | 41–24 | 63.1% | #6 | 1,919 | 0 | 5 | 2012 | 5–8 | 38.5% | #153 | 1,689 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2011 | 51–23 | 68.9% | #7 | 2,080 | 0 | 6 | 2013 | 22–22 | 50.0% | #54 | 1,815 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2012 | 52–20 | 72.2% | #6 | 2,157 | 0 | 8 | 2014 | 2–11 | 15.4% | #329 | 1,713 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2013 | 51–24 | 68.0% | #7 | 2,084 | 0 | 8 | 2015 | 2–1 | 66.7% | #159 | 1,729 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2014 | 53–22 | 70.7% | #7 | 2,082 | 0 | 10 | 2016 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #168 | 1,660 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2015 | 57–22 | 72.2% | #6 | 2,109 | 0 | 12 | 2017 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #320 | 1,662 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2016 | 39–19 | 67.2% | #10 | 2,080 | 0 | 13 | 2018 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #182 | 1,615 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | 2017 | 35–18 | 66.0% | #19 | 2,027 | 0 | 13 | 2019 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #465 | 1,604 | 0 | 0 |
| 32 | 2018 | 11–12 | 47.8% | #71 | 1,909 | 0 | 13 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 2019 | 13–9 | 59.1% | #104 | 1,869 | 0 | 13 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |