H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 14:16 UTC
Tomas Smid vs Damir Keretic H2H: 0-2
Damir Keretic holds a 2–0 lead over Tomas Smid in their ATP head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Damir Keretic leads 2–0 on clay. Most recently, Damir Keretic won the 1987 Palermo third round 7-6 7-6.
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
0
–
2
2 main draw meetings
GER
Age 66
Right-Handed
178 cm / 5'10"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 1, 1987* | Palermo | ATP 250 | R32 | Clay | Damir Keretic | 7-6 7-6 | Tomas Smid | Match data |
| Jun 1, 1986* | Roland Garros | Grand Slam | R32 | Clay | Damir Keretic | 4-6 4-6 6-4 6-1 6-3 | 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 |
| Damir Keretic | #837 | #58 | 35 | 1,740 | 87 | 120 | 42.0% | 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 Smid | Damir Keretic | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1979 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #400 | 1,496 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1976 | 5–7 | 41.7% | #154 | 1,542 | 0 | 0 | 1980 | 3–7 | 30.0% | #239 | 1,477 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1977 | 16–18 | 47.1% | #67 | 1,637 | 0 | 0 | 1981 | 3–6 | 33.3% | #239 | 1,475 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1978 | 36–25 | 59.0% | #36 | 1,799 | 0 | 1 | 1982 | 15–17 | 46.9% | #69 | 1,617 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 1979 | 50–25 | 66.7% | #27 | 1,870 | 0 | 2 | 1983 | 7–17 | 29.2% | #86 | 1,527 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 1980 | 45–21 | 68.2% | #23 | 1,950 | 0 | 4 | 1984 | 7–8 | 46.7% | #143 | 1,573 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 1981 | 54–28 | 65.9% | #28 | 1,864 | 0 | 5 | 1985 | 12–15 | 44.4% | #85 | 1,594 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 1982 | 62–28 | 68.9% | #24 | 1,901 | 0 | 7 | 1986 | 16–14 | 53.3% | #68 | 1,687 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 1983 | 59–30 | 66.3% | #17 | 1,902 | 0 | 9 | 1987 | 13–15 | 46.4% | #109 | 1,693 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 1984 | 46–27 | 63.0% | #16 | 1,840 | 0 | 9 | 1988 | 7–17 | 29.2% | #207 | 1,537 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 1985 | 47–27 | 63.5% | #19 | 1,804 | 0 | 10 | 1989 | 3–2 | 60.0% | #412 | 1,575 | 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 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |