H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Tomas Smid vs Hank Pfister H2H: 3-2
Tomas Smid holds a 3–2 lead over Hank Pfister in their ATP head-to-head. Across 5 main-draw meetings, Tomas Smid leads 3–1 on carpet, while Hank Pfister leads 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Tomas Smid won the 1984 Rotterdam third round 6-2 6-0.
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
3
–
2
5 main draw meetings
USA
Age 72
Right-Handed
193 cm / 6'4"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 15, 1984* | Rotterdam | ATP 250 | R32 | Carpet | Tomas Smid | 6-2 6-0 | Hank Pfister | Match data |
| Mar 9, 1984* | Brussels | ATP 250 | R16 | Carpet | Tomas Smid | 6-3 2-6 6-0 | Hank Pfister | Match data |
| Jun 22, 1983* | Wimbledon | Grand Slam | R128 | Grass | Hank Pfister | 6-3 6-4 3-6 6-3 | Tomas Smid | Match data |
| Feb 26, 1981* | Memphis | ATP 250 | R32 | Carpet | Tomas Smid | 4-6 6-3 6-1 | Hank Pfister | Match data |
| Feb 8, 1978* | Little Rock | ATP 250 | R32 | Carpet | Hank Pfister | 6-2 6-0 | 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 |
| Hank Pfister | #982 | #19 | 0 | 1,926 | 260 | 213 | 55.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
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 | Hank Pfister | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1975 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #252 | 1,459 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1978 | 36–25 | 59.0% | #36 | 1,799 | 0 | 1 | 1976 | 8–12 | 40.0% | #101 | 1,537 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 1979 | 50–25 | 66.7% | #27 | 1,870 | 0 | 2 | 1977 | 37–27 | 57.8% | #48 | 1,741 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 1980 | 45–21 | 68.2% | #23 | 1,950 | 0 | 4 | 1978 | 43–26 | 62.3% | #29 | 1,839 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 1981 | 54–28 | 65.9% | #28 | 1,864 | 0 | 5 | 1979 | 33–27 | 55.0% | #30 | 1,841 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 1982 | 62–28 | 68.9% | #24 | 1,901 | 0 | 7 | 1980 | 21–25 | 45.7% | #62 | 1,727 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 1983 | 59–30 | 66.3% | #17 | 1,902 | 0 | 9 | 1981 | 37–21 | 63.8% | #39 | 1,869 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 1984 | 46–27 | 63.0% | #16 | 1,840 | 0 | 9 | 1982 | 35–21 | 62.5% | #24 | 1,831 | 0 | 2 |
| 29 | 1985 | 47–27 | 63.5% | #19 | 1,804 | 0 | 10 | 1983 | 19–17 | 52.8% | #41 | 1,749 | 0 | 2 |
| 30 | 1986 | 28–24 | 53.8% | #54 | 1,721 | 0 | 10 | 1984 | 15–18 | 45.5% | #86 | 1,722 | 0 | 2 |
| 31 | 1987 | 30–26 | 53.6% | #31 | 1,729 | 0 | 10 | 1985 | 12–10 | 54.5% | #68 | 1,763 | 0 | 2 |
| 32 | 1988 | 17–23 | 42.5% | #115 | 1,656 | 0 | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 1989 | 2–9 | 18.2% | #453 | 1,537 | 0 | 10 | 1987 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #595 | 1,677 | 0 | 2 |
| 34 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1988 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #980 | 1,654 | 0 | 2 |