H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 07:16 UTC
Tomas Berdych vs Thomas Fabbiano H2H: 1-0
Tomas Berdych holds a 1–0 lead over Thomas Fabbiano in their ATP head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Tomas Berdych leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Tomas Berdych won the 2016 Dubai fourth round 6-2 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
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
ITA
Age 37
Right-Handed
173 cm / 5'8"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 25, 2016* | Dubai | ATP 500 | R16 | Hard | Tomas Berdych | 6-2 6-2 | Thomas Fabbiano | 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 |
| Thomas Fabbiano | #1,768 | #70 | 715 | 1,748 | 27 | 62 | 30.3% | 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 | Thomas Fabbiano | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 2008 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #371 | 1,533 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2006 | 42–24 | 63.6% | #13 | 1,933 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 21 | 2007 | 42–21 | 66.7% | #14 | 1,913 | 0 | 3 | 2010 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #313 | 1,552 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2008 | 30–18 | 62.5% | #20 | 1,919 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 23 | 2009 | 33–24 | 57.9% | #20 | 1,885 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 24 | 2010 | 41–24 | 63.1% | #6 | 1,919 | 0 | 5 | 2013 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #180 | 1,542 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2011 | 51–23 | 68.9% | #7 | 2,080 | 0 | 6 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 26 | 2012 | 52–20 | 72.2% | #6 | 2,157 | 0 | 8 | 2015 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #157 | 1,600 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2013 | 51–24 | 68.0% | #7 | 2,084 | 0 | 8 | 2016 | 5–9 | 35.7% | #124 | 1,620 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2014 | 53–22 | 70.7% | #7 | 2,082 | 0 | 10 | 2017 | 4–12 | 25.0% | #73 | 1,595 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2015 | 57–22 | 72.2% | #6 | 2,109 | 0 | 12 | 2018 | 8–12 | 40.0% | #101 | 1,670 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2016 | 39–19 | 67.2% | #10 | 2,080 | 0 | 13 | 2019 | 10–18 | 35.7% | #114 | 1,638 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | 2017 | 35–18 | 66.0% | #19 | 2,027 | 0 | 13 | 2020 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #172 | 1,593 | 0 | 0 |
| 32 | 2018 | 11–12 | 47.8% | #71 | 1,909 | 0 | 13 | 2021 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #204 | 1,516 | 0 | 0 |
| 33 | 2019 | 13–9 | 59.1% | #104 | 1,869 | 0 | 13 | 2022 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #317 | 1,525 | 0 | 0 |