H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 19:16 UTC
Tommy Haas vs Jimmy Wang H2H: 1-1
Tommy Haas and Jimmy Wang are tied 1–1 in their ATP head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Tommy Haas leads 1–0 on grass, while Jimmy Wang leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Tommy Haas won the 2013 Wimbledon second round 6-3 6-2 7-5.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
GER
Age 48
Right-Handed
188 cm / 6'2"
H2H
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
TPE
Age 41
Right-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 27, 2013* | Wimbledon | Grand Slam | R64 | Grass | Tommy Haas | 6-3 6-2 7-5 | Jimmy Wang | Match data |
| Sep 30, 2005* | Bangkok | ATP 250 | R16 | Hard | Jimmy Wang | 7-5 6-3 | Tommy Haas | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tommy Haas | #616 | #2 | 3,030 | 2,103 | 533 | 330 | 61.8% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 11 | 15 |
| Jimmy Wang | #1,017 | #85 | 487 | 1,731 | 22 | 41 | 34.9% | 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 | Tommy Haas | Jimmy Wang | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 18 | 1996 | 4–3 | 57.1% | #170 | 1,587 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 1997 | 22–17 | 56.4% | #45 | 1,721 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #184 | 1,510 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1998 | 34–26 | 56.7% | #34 | 1,840 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 3–8 | 27.3% | #100 | 1,513 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1999 | 45–23 | 66.2% | #11 | 1,859 | 0 | 1 | 2006 | 7–15 | 31.8% | #148 | 1,554 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2000 | 27–20 | 57.4% | #23 | 1,777 | 0 | 1 | 2007 | 3–2 | 60.0% | #148 | 1,571 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2001 | 53–21 | 71.6% | #8 | 2,009 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 24 | 2002 | 43–22 | 66.2% | #11 | 1,849 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 26 | 2004 | 35–18 | 66.0% | #17 | 1,909 | 0 | 7 | 2011 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #274 | 1,545 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2005 | 28–21 | 57.1% | #45 | 1,766 | 0 | 7 | 2012 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #156 | 1,634 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2006 | 48–19 | 71.6% | #11 | 1,893 | 0 | 10 | 2013 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #174 | 1,586 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2007 | 36–17 | 67.9% | #12 | 1,892 | 0 | 11 | 2014 | 4–5 | 44.4% | #124 | 1,696 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2008 | 18–15 | 54.5% | #82 | 1,855 | 0 | 11 | 2015 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #310 | 1,674 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | 2009 | 31–18 | 63.3% | #18 | 1,913 | 0 | 12 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 2010 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #372 | 1,844 | 0 | 12 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 2011 | 7–12 | 36.8% | #205 | 1,762 | 0 | 12 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 34 | 2012 | 31–17 | 64.6% | #21 | 1,966 | 0 | 13 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 35 | 2013 | 46–23 | 66.7% | #12 | 2,011 | 0 | 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 36 | 2014 | 14–11 | 56.0% | #77 | 1,904 | 0 | 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 37 | 2015 | 2–9 | 18.2% | #470 | 1,784 | 0 | 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 39 | 2017 | 6–14 | 30.0% | #252 | 1,686 | 0 | 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |