H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Agnieszka Radwanska vs Dominika Cibulkova H2H: 6-6
Agnieszka Radwanska and Dominika Cibulkova are tied 6–6 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 12 main-draw meetings, Agnieszka Radwanska leads 6–3 on hard courts, while Dominika Cibulkova leads 2–0 on grass. Most recently, Dominika Cibulkova won the 2016 Wimbledon fourth round 6-3 5-7 9-7.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
POL
Age 37
Right-Handed
173 cm / 5'8"
H2H
6
–
6
12 main draw meetings
SVK
Age 37
Right-Handed
161 cm / 5'3"
H2H Match Log
* 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agnieszka Radwanska | #74 | #2 | 8,530 | 2,081 | 506 | 237 | 68.1% | 0 | 5 | 1 | 8 | 6 | 20 |
| Dominika Cibulkova | #315 | #4 | 5,245 | 1,966 | 365 | 261 | 58.3% | 0 | 0 | 1 | 5 | 2 | 8 |
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 | Agnieszka Radwanska | Dominika Cibulkova | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 2006 | 11–8 | 57.9% | #61 | 1,673 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #153 | 1,506 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2007 | 27–19 | 58.7% | #26 | 1,808 | 0 | 1 | 2007 | 17–17 | 50.0% | #51 | 1,605 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2008 | 51–19 | 72.9% | #10 | 1,926 | 0 | 4 | 2008 | 34–25 | 57.6% | #19 | 1,840 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2009 | 44–23 | 65.7% | #10 | 1,910 | 0 | 4 | 2009 | 20–17 | 54.1% | #28 | 1,733 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2010 | 32–18 | 64.0% | #14 | 1,860 | 0 | 4 | 2010 | 30–24 | 55.6% | #31 | 1,753 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2011 | 46–18 | 71.9% | #8 | 1,979 | 0 | 7 | 2011 | 41–21 | 66.1% | #18 | 1,893 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 2012 | 59–19 | 75.6% | #4 | 1,994 | 0 | 10 | 2012 | 34–25 | 57.6% | #15 | 1,810 | 0 | 2 |
| 24 | 2013 | 56–20 | 73.7% | #5 | 1,957 | 0 | 13 | 2013 | 27–23 | 54.0% | #23 | 1,738 | 0 | 3 |
| 25 | 2014 | 43–22 | 66.2% | #6 | 1,872 | 0 | 14 | 2014 | 33–22 | 60.0% | #10 | 1,721 | 0 | 4 |
| 26 | 2015 | 50–22 | 69.4% | #5 | 1,957 | 0 | 17 | 2015 | 19–16 | 54.3% | #38 | 1,757 | 0 | 4 |
| 27 | 2016 | 51–18 | 73.9% | #3 | 1,942 | 0 | 20 | 2016 | 53–21 | 71.6% | #5 | 1,951 | 0 | 8 |
| 28 | 2017 | 25–18 | 58.1% | #28 | 1,812 | 0 | 20 | 2017 | 26–22 | 54.2% | #26 | 1,778 | 0 | 8 |
| 29 | 2018 | 11–13 | 45.8% | #74 | 1,727 | 0 | 20 | 2018 | 27–18 | 60.0% | #25 | 1,865 | 0 | 8 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2019 | 2–8 | 20.0% | #315 | 1,764 | 0 | 8 |