H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Ai Sugiyama vs Jelena Kostanic Tosic H2H: 2-0
Ai Sugiyama holds a 2–0 lead over Jelena Kostanic Tosic in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Ai Sugiyama leads 2–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Ai Sugiyama won the 2005 Toronto second round 6-2 3-6 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.
JPN
Age 51
Right-Handed
163 cm / 5'4"
H2H
2
–
0
2 main draw meetings
CRO
Age 45
Left-Handed
168 cm / 5'6"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 15, 2005 | Toronto | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard | Ai Sugiyama | 6-2 3-6 6-2 | Jelena Kostanic Tosic | Match data |
| Sep 5, 2004* | US Open | Grand Slam | R32 | Hard | Ai Sugiyama | 6-1 6-3 | Jelena Kostanic Tosic | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ai Sugiyama | #97 | #8 | 2,400 | 1,951 | 411 | 362 | 53.2% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 2 | 6 |
| Jelena Kostanic Tosic | #937 | #32 | 900 | 1,726 | 112 | 151 | 42.6% | 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 | Ai Sugiyama | Jelena Kostanic Tosic | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | 1992 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #184 | 1,477 | 0 | 0 | 1998 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #240 | 1,490 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 1993 | 3–8 | 27.3% | #145 | 1,487 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 4–5 | 44.4% | #97 | 1,512 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 1994 | 9–11 | 45.0% | #72 | 1,557 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 10–13 | 43.5% | #114 | 1,523 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1995 | 16–17 | 48.5% | #46 | 1,691 | 0 | 0 | 2001 | 4–4 | 50.0% | #131 | 1,559 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1996 | 22–18 | 55.0% | #28 | 1,738 | 0 | 0 | 2002 | 14–17 | 45.2% | #70 | 1,570 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1997 | 31–25 | 55.4% | #21 | 1,833 | 0 | 1 | 2003 | 16–20 | 44.4% | #66 | 1,621 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1998 | 37–21 | 63.8% | #18 | 1,859 | 0 | 3 | 2004 | 22–25 | 46.8% | #35 | 1,678 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 1999 | 27–23 | 54.0% | #24 | 1,806 | 0 | 3 | 2005 | 11–21 | 34.4% | #87 | 1,549 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2000 | 20–24 | 45.5% | #32 | 1,687 | 0 | 3 | 2006 | 19–18 | 51.4% | #51 | 1,577 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2001 | 28–25 | 52.8% | #30 | 1,720 | 0 | 3 | 2007 | 10–17 | 37.0% | #103 | 1,534 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2002 | 35–26 | 57.4% | #24 | 1,755 | 0 | 3 | 2008 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #114 | 1,499 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2003 | 44–25 | 63.8% | #10 | 1,915 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 2004 | 30–22 | 57.7% | #17 | 1,802 | 0 | 6 | 2010 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #830 | 1,460 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2005 | 28–27 | 50.9% | #29 | 1,742 | 0 | 6 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 2006 | 28–25 | 52.8% | #26 | 1,742 | 0 | 6 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 2007 | 17–21 | 44.7% | #38 | 1,632 | 0 | 6 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 2008 | 26–21 | 55.3% | #31 | 1,742 | 0 | 6 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 2009 | 9–19 | 32.1% | #97 | 1,647 | 0 | 6 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |