H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Agnieszka Radwanska vs Evgeniya Rodina H2H: 1-0
Agnieszka Radwanska holds a 1–0 lead over Evgeniya Rodina in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Agnieszka Radwanska leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Agnieszka Radwanska won the 2016 Tianjin fourth round 6-1 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.
POL
Age 37
Right-Handed
173 cm / 5'8"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
RUS
Age 37
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 14, 2016* | Tianjin | WTA 250 | R16 | Hard | Agnieszka Radwanska | 6-1 6-1 | Evgeniya Rodina | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agnieszka Radwanska | #74 | #2 | 8,530 | 2,081 | 506 | 237 | 68.1% | 0 | 5 | 1 | 8 | 6 | 20 |
| Evgeniya Rodina | #1,376 | #67 | 882 | 1,663 | 74 | 119 | 38.3% | 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 | Agnieszka Radwanska | Evgeniya Rodina | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2005 | 2–1 | 66.7% | #320 | 1,516 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 2006 | 11–8 | 57.9% | #61 | 1,673 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 2007 | 27–19 | 58.7% | #26 | 1,808 | 0 | 1 | 2007 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #120 | 1,524 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2008 | 51–19 | 72.9% | #10 | 1,926 | 0 | 4 | 2008 | 5–9 | 35.7% | #145 | 1,523 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2009 | 44–23 | 65.7% | #10 | 1,910 | 0 | 4 | 2009 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #99 | 1,527 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2010 | 32–18 | 64.0% | #14 | 1,860 | 0 | 4 | 2010 | 5–4 | 55.6% | #107 | 1,579 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2011 | 46–18 | 71.9% | #8 | 1,979 | 0 | 7 | 2011 | 9–12 | 42.9% | #106 | 1,560 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2012 | 59–19 | 75.6% | #4 | 1,994 | 0 | 10 | 2012 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #370 | 1,546 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2013 | 56–20 | 73.7% | #5 | 1,957 | 0 | 13 | 2013 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #474 | 1,529 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2014 | 43–22 | 66.2% | #6 | 1,872 | 0 | 14 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 26 | 2015 | 50–22 | 69.4% | #5 | 1,957 | 0 | 17 | 2015 | 14–17 | 45.2% | #87 | 1,588 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2016 | 51–18 | 73.9% | #3 | 1,942 | 0 | 20 | 2016 | 8–13 | 38.1% | #86 | 1,650 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2017 | 25–18 | 58.1% | #28 | 1,812 | 0 | 20 | 2017 | 9–18 | 33.3% | #105 | 1,572 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2018 | 11–13 | 45.8% | #74 | 1,727 | 0 | 20 | 2018 | 9–11 | 45.0% | #71 | 1,570 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2019 | 4–16 | 20.0% | #295 | 1,467 | 0 | 0 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2022 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #438 | 1,512 | 0 | 0 |
| 34 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2023 | 3–8 | 27.3% | #443 | 1,504 | 0 | 0 |