H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 14:16 UTC

Tommy Robredo vs Lleyton Hewitt H2H: 1-1

Tommy Robredo and Lleyton Hewitt are tied 1–1 in their ATP head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Tommy Robredo leads 1–0 on clay, while Lleyton Hewitt leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Lleyton Hewitt won the 2004 Cincinnati Masters semifinal 6-3 6-2.

Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.

Tommy Robredo
ESP Age 44 Right-Handed 180 cm / 5'11"
H2H
1 – 1
2 main draw meetings
Lleyton Hewitt
AUS Age 45 Right-Handed 178 cm / 5'10"

H2H Match Log

DateTournamentCategoryRoundSurfaceWinnerScoreLoserMatch
Aug 8, 2004* Cincinnati Masters Masters 1000 SF Hard Lleyton Hewitt #10 6-3 6-2 Tommy Robredo #27 Match data
Jun 1, 2003* Roland Garros Grand Slam R32 Clay Tommy Robredo #31 4-6 1-6 6-3 6-2 6-3 Lleyton Hewitt #1 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 Robredo #1,059 #5 2,770 2,048 523 351 59.8% 0 1 0 0 11 12
Lleyton Hewitt #636 #1 5,205 2,159 564 241 70.1% 2 2 2 1 23 30

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 Robredo Lleyton Hewitt
YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles
16 — — — — — — — 1997 0–1 0.0% #550 1,492 0 0
17 1999 2–2 50.0% #244 1,534 0 0 1998 10–9 52.6% #100 1,614 0 1
18 2000 0–2 0.0% #131 1,496 0 0 1999 40–18 69.0% #25 1,853 0 2
19 2001 37–20 64.9% #30 1,761 0 1 2000 53–15 77.9% #7 1,993 0 6
20 2002 32–25 56.1% #30 1,794 0 1 2001 71–15 82.6% #1 2,116 1 12
21 2003 38–26 59.4% #21 1,761 0 1 2002 61–16 79.2% #1 2,062 2 17
22 2004 39–24 61.9% #13 1,823 0 2 2003 29–10 74.4% #17 1,939 2 19
23 2005 42–24 63.6% #19 1,849 0 2 2004 64–16 80.0% #3 2,076 2 23
24 2006 49–26 65.3% #7 1,868 0 4 2005 36–9 80.0% #4 2,092 2 24
25 2007 48–25 65.8% #10 1,856 0 6 2006 32–14 69.6% #20 1,964 2 25
26 2008 35–22 61.4% #21 1,882 0 7 2007 34–15 69.4% #21 1,925 2 26
27 2009 46–24 65.7% #16 1,903 0 9 2008 17–10 63.0% #67 1,936 2 26
28 2010 20–23 46.5% #50 1,796 0 9 2009 33–19 63.5% #22 1,956 2 27
29 2011 20–14 58.8% #51 1,760 0 10 2010 18–11 62.1% #54 1,907 2 28
30 2012 5–7 41.7% #114 1,752 0 10 2011 8–9 47.1% #186 1,817 2 28
31 2013 36–20 64.3% #18 2,000 0 12 2012 13–11 54.2% #83 1,867 2 28
32 2014 43–26 62.3% #17 1,998 0 12 2013 22–18 55.0% #60 1,884 2 28
33 2015 23–20 53.5% #42 1,883 0 12 2014 19–15 55.9% #50 1,841 2 30
34 2016 2–6 25.0% #358 1,814 0 12 2015 3–9 25.0% #307 1,715 2 30
35 2017 6–11 35.3% #164 1,740 0 12 2016 1–1 50.0% #633 1,727 2 30
36 2018 0–2 0.0% #201 1,684 0 12 — — — — — — —
37 2019 0–1 0.0% #205 1,582 0 12 — — — — — — —
40 2022 0–1 0.0% #1043 1,502 0 12 — — — — — — —