H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 14:16 UTC
Tomas Smid vs Roscoe Tanner H2H: 0-3
Roscoe Tanner holds a 3–0 lead over Tomas Smid in their ATP head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Roscoe Tanner leads 2–0 on carpet and 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Roscoe Tanner won the 1980 Las Vegas third round 7-5 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
0
–
3
3 main draw meetings
USA
Age 74
Left-Handed
183 cm / 6'0"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 25, 1980* | Las Vegas | ATP 250 | R32 | Hard | Roscoe Tanner | 7-5 6-1 | Tomas Smid | Match data |
| Feb 29, 1980* | Memphis | ATP 250 | R16 | Carpet | Roscoe Tanner | 6-3 6-2 | Tomas Smid | Match data |
| Mar 16, 1979* | Washington Indoor | ATP 250 | R16 | Carpet | Roscoe Tanner | 6-3 4-6 7-6 | 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 |
| Roscoe Tanner | #789 | #4 | 0 | 2,158 | 595 | 298 | 66.6% | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 15 | 17 |
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 | Roscoe Tanner | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1969 | 0–2 | 0.0% | — | 1,479 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1970 | 0–9 | 0.0% | — | 1,417 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1971 | 16–10 | 61.5% | — | 1,703 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1976 | 5–7 | 41.7% | #154 | 1,542 | 0 | 0 | 1972 | 29–14 | 67.4% | — | 1,911 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1977 | 16–18 | 47.1% | #67 | 1,637 | 0 | 0 | 1973 | 45–30 | 60.0% | #24 | 1,812 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1978 | 36–25 | 59.0% | #36 | 1,799 | 0 | 1 | 1974 | 66–28 | 70.2% | #14 | 1,959 | 0 | 2 |
| 23 | 1979 | 50–25 | 66.7% | #27 | 1,870 | 0 | 2 | 1975 | 65–24 | 73.0% | #9 | 1,965 | 0 | 5 |
| 24 | 1980 | 45–21 | 68.2% | #23 | 1,950 | 0 | 4 | 1976 | 70–28 | 71.4% | #11 | 2,012 | 0 | 9 |
| 25 | 1981 | 54–28 | 65.9% | #28 | 1,864 | 0 | 5 | 1977 | 52–30 | 63.4% | #15 | 1,880 | 1 | 11 |
| 26 | 1982 | 62–28 | 68.9% | #24 | 1,901 | 0 | 7 | 1978 | 59–24 | 71.1% | #11 | 1,935 | 1 | 13 |
| 27 | 1983 | 59–30 | 66.3% | #17 | 1,902 | 0 | 9 | 1979 | 61–19 | 76.2% | #5 | 2,025 | 1 | 15 |
| 28 | 1984 | 46–27 | 63.0% | #16 | 1,840 | 0 | 9 | 1980 | 42–16 | 72.4% | #13 | 1,993 | 1 | 16 |
| 29 | 1985 | 47–27 | 63.5% | #19 | 1,804 | 0 | 10 | 1981 | 51–22 | 69.9% | #12 | 1,901 | 1 | 17 |
| 30 | 1986 | 28–24 | 53.8% | #54 | 1,721 | 0 | 10 | 1982 | 20–17 | 54.1% | #43 | 1,779 | 1 | 17 |
| 31 | 1987 | 30–26 | 53.6% | #31 | 1,729 | 0 | 10 | 1983 | 16–13 | 55.2% | #36 | 1,872 | 1 | 17 |
| 32 | 1988 | 17–23 | 42.5% | #115 | 1,656 | 0 | 10 | 1984 | 3–11 | 21.4% | #249 | 1,679 | 1 | 17 |
| 33 | 1989 | 2–9 | 18.2% | #453 | 1,537 | 0 | 10 | 1985 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #794 | 1,661 | 1 | 17 |