H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Alisa Kleybanova vs Shahar Peer H2H: 1-2
Shahar Peer holds a 2–1 lead over Alisa Kleybanova in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Shahar Peer leads 2–1 on clay. Most recently, Shahar Peer won the 2011 Rome third round 6-3 7-5.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
RUS
Age 37
Right-Handed
181 cm / 5'11"
H2H
1
–
2
3 main draw meetings
ISR
Age 39
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 12, 2011* | Rome | WTA 1000 | R32 | Clay | Shahar Peer | 6-3 7-5 | Alisa Kleybanova | Match data |
| May 4, 2011* | Madrid | WTA 1000 | R64 | Clay | Alisa Kleybanova | 6-3 6-2 | Shahar Peer | Match data |
| May 13, 2010* | Madrid | WTA 1000 | R32 | Clay | Shahar Peer | 7-6(4) 6-0 | Alisa Kleybanova | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alisa Kleybanova | #784 | #20 | 2,485 | 1,875 | 108 | 92 | 54.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| Shahar Peer | #1,185 | #11 | 3,410 | 1,966 | 268 | 204 | 56.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 5 |
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 | Alisa Kleybanova | Shahar Peer | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 14 | 2004 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #368 | 1,514 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 15 | 2005 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #237 | 1,499 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 16 | 2006 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #240 | 1,473 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2004 | 3–3 | 50.0% | #176 | 1,509 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2008 | 17–16 | 51.5% | #32 | 1,636 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 22–20 | 52.4% | #45 | 1,636 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2009 | 31–24 | 56.4% | #29 | 1,776 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 38–20 | 65.5% | #20 | 1,826 | 0 | 3 |
| 20 | 2010 | 32–23 | 58.2% | #25 | 1,825 | 0 | 2 | 2007 | 39–21 | 65.0% | #17 | 1,830 | 0 | 3 |
| 21 | 2011 | 14–12 | 53.8% | #68 | 1,778 | 0 | 2 | 2008 | 24–20 | 54.5% | #38 | 1,707 | 0 | 3 |
| 22 | 2012 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #545 | 1,774 | 0 | 2 | 2009 | 36–21 | 63.2% | #30 | 1,787 | 0 | 5 |
| 23 | 2013 | 4–4 | 50.0% | #188 | 1,769 | 0 | 2 | 2010 | 47–21 | 69.1% | #13 | 1,885 | 0 | 5 |
| 24 | 2014 | 8–8 | 50.0% | #139 | 1,766 | 0 | 2 | 2011 | 23–21 | 52.3% | #37 | 1,706 | 0 | 5 |
| 25 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2012 | 15–22 | 40.5% | #74 | 1,584 | 0 | 5 |
| 26 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2013 | 10–14 | 41.7% | #77 | 1,558 | 0 | 5 |
| 27 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2014 | 10–18 | 35.7% | #117 | 1,539 | 0 | 5 |
| 28 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2015 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #177 | 1,526 | 0 | 5 |