H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 01:16 UTC
Tomas Berdych vs Jurgen Zopp H2H: 2-0
Tomas Berdych holds a 2–0 lead over Jurgen Zopp in their ATP head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Tomas Berdych leads 2–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Tomas Berdych won the 2012 Stockholm fourth round 6-1 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.
CZE
Age 40
Right-Handed
196 cm / 6'5"
H2H
2
–
0
2 main draw meetings
EST
Age 38
Right-Handed
190 cm / 6'3"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 19, 2012* | Stockholm | ATP 250 | R16 | Hard | Tomas Berdych | 6-1 6-4 | Jurgen Zopp | Match data |
| Aug 30, 2012* | US Open | Grand Slam | R64 | Hard | Tomas Berdych | 6-1 6-4 6-2 | Jurgen Zopp | 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 |
| Jurgen Zopp | #1,406 | #71 | 656 | 1,718 | 16 | 31 | 34.0% | 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 | Jurgen Zopp | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 2006 | 42–24 | 63.6% | #13 | 1,933 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 21 | 2007 | 42–21 | 66.7% | #14 | 1,913 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 22 | 2008 | 30–18 | 62.5% | #20 | 1,919 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 23 | 2009 | 33–24 | 57.9% | #20 | 1,885 | 0 | 5 | 2011 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #146 | 1,562 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2010 | 41–24 | 63.1% | #6 | 1,919 | 0 | 5 | 2012 | 7–11 | 38.9% | #89 | 1,672 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2011 | 51–23 | 68.9% | #7 | 2,080 | 0 | 6 | 2013 | 1–6 | 14.3% | #334 | 1,610 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2012 | 52–20 | 72.2% | #6 | 2,157 | 0 | 8 | 2014 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #189 | 1,636 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2013 | 51–24 | 68.0% | #7 | 2,084 | 0 | 8 | 2015 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #163 | 1,610 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2014 | 53–22 | 70.7% | #7 | 2,082 | 0 | 10 | 2016 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #329 | 1,603 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2015 | 57–22 | 72.2% | #6 | 2,109 | 0 | 12 | 2017 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #163 | 1,616 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2016 | 39–19 | 67.2% | #10 | 2,080 | 0 | 13 | 2018 | 5–6 | 45.5% | #143 | 1,601 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | 2017 | 35–18 | 66.0% | #19 | 2,027 | 0 | 13 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 2018 | 11–12 | 47.8% | #71 | 1,909 | 0 | 13 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 2019 | 13–9 | 59.1% | #104 | 1,869 | 0 | 13 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |