H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Aiko Nakamura vs Tamira Paszek H2H: 0-2
Tamira Paszek holds a 2–0 lead over Aiko Nakamura in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Tamira Paszek leads 1–0 on clay and 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Tamira Paszek won the 2008 Los Angeles second round 6-4 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 42
Right-Handed
163 cm / 5'4"
H2H
0
–
2
2 main draw meetings
Age 35
Right-Handed
165 cm / 5'5"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 23, 2008* | Los Angeles | WTA 500 | R64 | Hard | Tamira Paszek | 6-4 6-2 | Aiko Nakamura | Match data |
| May 29, 2007* | Roland Garros | Grand Slam | R128 | Clay | Tamira Paszek | 6-4 6-0 | Aiko Nakamura | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aiko Nakamura | #730 | #47 | 569 | 1,645 | 50 | 76 | 39.7% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Tamira Paszek | — | — | — | 1,801 | 99 | 128 | 43.6% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
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 | Aiko Nakamura | Tamira Paszek | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 14 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2005 | 1–1 | 50.0% | — | 1,512 | 0 | 0 |
| 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2006 | 6–2 | 75.0% | — | 1,598 | 0 | 1 |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2007 | 15–14 | 51.7% | — | 1,730 | 0 | 1 |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2008 | 16–18 | 47.1% | — | 1,697 | 0 | 1 |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2009 | 5–9 | 35.7% | — | 1,626 | 0 | 1 |
| 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2010 | 9–9 | 50.0% | — | 1,641 | 0 | 2 |
| 20 | 2004 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #135 | 1,505 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 19–21 | 47.5% | — | 1,664 | 0 | 2 |
| 21 | 2005 | 11–13 | 45.8% | #71 | 1,568 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 18–20 | 47.4% | — | 1,687 | 0 | 3 |
| 22 | 2006 | 19–18 | 51.4% | #57 | 1,622 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 2–17 | 10.5% | — | 1,483 | 0 | 3 |
| 23 | 2007 | 13–21 | 38.2% | #66 | 1,549 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 1–4 | 20.0% | — | 1,475 | 0 | 3 |
| 24 | 2008 | 5–18 | 21.7% | #146 | 1,488 | 0 | 0 | 2015 | 1–4 | 20.0% | — | 1,447 | 0 | 3 |
| 25 | 2009 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #224 | 1,461 | 0 | 0 | 2016 | 6–9 | 40.0% | — | 1,498 | 0 | 3 |
| 26 | 2010 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #677 | 1,474 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 27 | 2011 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #231 | 1,468 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |