H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 07:16 UTC

Tommy Haas vs Nicolas Kiefer H2H: 2-3

Nicolas Kiefer holds a 3–2 lead over Tommy Haas in their ATP head-to-head. Across 5 main-draw meetings, Nicolas Kiefer leads 2–0 on clay, while they are tied 1–1 on hard courts. Most recently, Nicolas Kiefer won the 2005 Rome Masters second round 6-3 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.

Tommy Haas
GER Age 48 Right-Handed 188 cm / 6'2"
H2H
2 – 3
5 main draw meetings
Nicolas Kiefer
GER Age 49 Right-Handed 183 cm / 6'0"

H2H Match Log

DateTournamentCategoryRoundSurfaceWinnerScoreLoserMatch
May 4, 2005* Rome Masters Masters 1000 R64 Clay Nicolas Kiefer #30 6-3 6-1 Tommy Haas #22 Match data
Jul 18, 2004* Los Angeles ATP 250 F Hard Tommy Haas #91 7-6(6) 6-4 Nicolas Kiefer #32 Match data
Jun 28, 2000* Wimbledon Grand Slam R128 Grass Tommy Haas #23 5-7 6-4 6-2 6-3 Nicolas Kiefer #12 Match data
Aug 7, 1999* Canada Masters Masters 1000 R16 Hard Nicolas Kiefer #17 6-3 7-6(4) Tommy Haas #15 Match data
May 27, 1998* Roland Garros Grand Slam R128 Clay Nicolas Kiefer #24 6-1 6-2 7-6(3) Tommy Haas #44 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
Nicolas Kiefer #720 #4 2,447 1,984 343 252 57.6% 0 0 0 0 6 6

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 Nicolas Kiefer
YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles
16 — — — — — — — 1994 0–1 0.0% #1198 1,489 0 0
17 — — — — — — — 1995 3–3 50.0% #206 1,527 0 0
18 1996 4–3 57.1% #170 1,587 0 0 1996 7–9 43.8% #128 1,562 0 0
19 1997 22–17 56.4% #45 1,721 0 0 1997 26–16 61.9% #32 1,798 0 1
20 1998 34–26 56.7% #34 1,840 0 0 1998 31–25 55.4% #35 1,790 0 1
21 1999 45–23 66.2% #11 1,859 0 1 1999 53–21 71.6% #6 1,921 0 4
22 2000 27–20 57.4% #23 1,777 0 1 2000 30–15 66.7% #20 1,921 0 6
23 2001 53–21 71.6% #8 2,009 0 5 2001 26–25 51.0% #42 1,766 0 6
24 2002 43–22 66.2% #11 1,849 0 5 2002 19–24 44.2% #72 1,718 0 6
25 — — — — — — — 2003 19–17 52.8% #58 1,727 0 6
26 2004 35–18 66.0% #17 1,909 0 7 2004 32–19 62.7% #21 1,897 0 6
27 2005 28–21 57.1% #45 1,766 0 7 2005 31–22 58.5% #22 1,854 0 6
28 2006 48–19 71.6% #11 1,893 0 10 2006 14–8 63.6% #48 1,843 0 6
29 2007 36–17 67.9% #12 1,892 0 11 2007 19–12 61.3% #49 1,893 0 6
30 2008 18–15 54.5% #82 1,855 0 11 2008 20–16 55.6% #38 1,876 0 6
31 2009 31–18 63.3% #18 1,913 0 12 2009 12–16 42.9% #116 1,757 0 6
32 2010 3–4 42.9% #372 1,844 0 12 2010 1–3 25.0% #722 1,717 0 6
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 — — — — — — —