H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 17:48 UTC
Tomas Smid vs Chip Hooper H2H: 1-1
Tomas Smid and Chip Hooper are tied 1–1 in their ATP head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on carpet. Most recently, Tomas Smid won the 1982 Wembley fourth round 7-6 6-1.
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 70
Right-Handed
190 cm / 6'3"
H2H
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
USA
Age 67
Right-Handed
198 cm / 6'6"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 12, 1982* | Wembley | ATP 250 | R16 | Carpet | Tomas Smid | 7-6 6-1 | Chip Hooper | Match data |
| Apr 3, 1982* | Frankfurt | ATP 250 | QF | Carpet | Chip Hooper | 6-2 5-7 6-2 | Tomas Smid | 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 Smid | #975 | #11 | 28 | 1,998 | 497 | 318 | 61.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 10 |
| Chip Hooper | #1,046 | #17 | 0 | 1,854 | 104 | 119 | 46.6% | 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 Smid | Chip Hooper | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 20 | 1976 | 5–7 | 41.7% | #154 | 1,542 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 21 | 1977 | 16–18 | 47.1% | #67 | 1,637 | 0 | 0 | 1980 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #390 | 1,500 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1978 | 36–25 | 59.0% | #36 | 1,799 | 0 | 1 | 1981 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #390 | 1,538 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 1979 | 50–25 | 66.7% | #27 | 1,870 | 0 | 2 | 1982 | 34–24 | 58.6% | #32 | 1,766 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 1980 | 45–21 | 68.2% | #23 | 1,950 | 0 | 4 | 1983 | 24–24 | 50.0% | #59 | 1,739 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 1981 | 54–28 | 65.9% | #28 | 1,864 | 0 | 5 | 1984 | 18–21 | 46.2% | #96 | 1,600 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 1982 | 62–28 | 68.9% | #24 | 1,901 | 0 | 7 | 1985 | 14–18 | 43.8% | #114 | 1,676 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 1983 | 59–30 | 66.3% | #17 | 1,902 | 0 | 9 | 1986 | 5–12 | 29.4% | #222 | 1,577 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 1984 | 46–27 | 63.0% | #16 | 1,840 | 0 | 9 | 1987 | 6–11 | 35.3% | #150 | 1,552 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 1985 | 47–27 | 63.5% | #19 | 1,804 | 0 | 10 | 1988 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #561 | 1,506 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 1986 | 28–24 | 53.8% | #54 | 1,721 | 0 | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 1987 | 30–26 | 53.6% | #31 | 1,729 | 0 | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 1988 | 17–23 | 42.5% | #115 | 1,656 | 0 | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 1989 | 2–9 | 18.2% | #453 | 1,537 | 0 | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |