H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Tomas Smid vs Michael Westphal H2H: 3-1
Tomas Smid holds a 3–1 lead over Michael Westphal in their ATP head-to-head. Across 4 main-draw meetings, Tomas Smid leads 2–0 on hard courts, while Michael Westphal leads 1–0 on carpet. Most recently, Michael Westphal won the 1986 Memphis third round 7-6 4-6 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
3
–
1
4 main draw meetings
GER
Right-Handed
190 cm / 6'3"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 6, 1986* | Memphis | ATP 250 | R32 | Carpet | Michael Westphal | 7-6 4-6 7-6 | Tomas Smid | Match data |
| May 10, 1984* | Hamburg | ATP 250 | R32 | Clay | Tomas Smid | 6-1 7-6 | Michael Westphal | Match data |
| Nov 11, 1982* | Toulouse | ATP 250 | SF | Hard | Tomas Smid | 3-6 6-1 6-4 | Michael Westphal | Match data |
| Oct 28, 1982* | Cologne | ATP 250 | R32 | Hard | Tomas Smid | 6-3 6-1 | Michael Westphal | 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 |
| Michael Westphal | #1,050 | #49 | 81 | 1,754 | 73 | 97 | 42.9% | 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 | Michael Westphal | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1982 | 4–6 | 40.0% | — | 1,557 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1983 | 7–9 | 43.8% | #96 | 1,569 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1984 | 19–14 | 57.6% | #73 | 1,712 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1976 | 5–7 | 41.7% | #154 | 1,542 | 0 | 0 | 1985 | 15–16 | 48.4% | #51 | 1,702 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1977 | 16–18 | 47.1% | #67 | 1,637 | 0 | 0 | 1986 | 12–21 | 36.4% | #101 | 1,642 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1978 | 36–25 | 59.0% | #36 | 1,799 | 0 | 1 | 1987 | 5–15 | 25.0% | #279 | 1,566 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 1979 | 50–25 | 66.7% | #27 | 1,870 | 0 | 2 | 1988 | 6–9 | 40.0% | #116 | 1,555 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 1980 | 45–21 | 68.2% | #23 | 1,950 | 0 | 4 | 1989 | 5–7 | 41.7% | #233 | 1,567 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 1981 | 54–28 | 65.9% | #28 | 1,864 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 26 | 1982 | 62–28 | 68.9% | #24 | 1,901 | 0 | 7 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 27 | 1983 | 59–30 | 66.3% | #17 | 1,902 | 0 | 9 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 1984 | 46–27 | 63.0% | #16 | 1,840 | 0 | 9 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 1985 | 47–27 | 63.5% | #19 | 1,804 | 0 | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 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 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |