H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 16:30 UTC
Alison Van Uytvanck vs Zarina Diyas H2H: 1-0
Alison Van Uytvanck holds a 1–0 lead over Zarina Diyas in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Alison Van Uytvanck leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Alison Van Uytvanck won the 2015 Roland Garros second round 0-6 6-1 6-4.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
BEL
Age 32
Right-Handed
173 cm / 5'8"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
KAZ
Age 32
Right-Handed
172 cm / 5'8"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 28, 2015* | Roland Garros | Grand Slam | R64 | Clay | Alison Van Uytvanck | 0-6 6-1 6-4 | Zarina Diyas | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alison Van Uytvanck | #229 | #37 | 1,355 | 1,765 | 119 | 147 | 44.7% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 5 |
| Zarina Diyas | #437 | #31 | 1,495 | 1,751 | 99 | 127 | 43.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
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 | Alison Van Uytvanck | Zarina Diyas | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2009 | 2–1 | 66.7% | #242 | 1,527 | 0 | 0 |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2010 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #172 | 1,539 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 2011 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #287 | 1,510 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #227 | 1,503 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2012 | 2–1 | 66.7% | #199 | 1,554 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #264 | 1,476 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2013 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #112 | 1,524 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #163 | 1,477 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2014 | 10–17 | 37.0% | #106 | 1,528 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 20–14 | 58.8% | #33 | 1,683 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2015 | 19–18 | 51.4% | #44 | 1,649 | 0 | 0 | 2015 | 20–27 | 42.6% | #52 | 1,576 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2016 | 4–13 | 23.5% | #121 | 1,517 | 0 | 0 | 2016 | 8–12 | 40.0% | #150 | 1,558 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2017 | 8–7 | 53.3% | #76 | 1,619 | 0 | 1 | 2017 | 7–4 | 63.6% | #66 | 1,667 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 2018 | 18–21 | 46.2% | #49 | 1,650 | 0 | 2 | 2018 | 13–19 | 40.6% | #89 | 1,718 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 2019 | 24–19 | 55.8% | #47 | 1,713 | 0 | 4 | 2019 | 7–14 | 33.3% | #77 | 1,697 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2020 | 7–11 | 38.9% | #64 | 1,663 | 0 | 4 | 2020 | 5–6 | 45.5% | #80 | 1,655 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2021 | 13–14 | 48.1% | #58 | 1,752 | 0 | 5 | 2021 | 13–16 | 44.8% | #102 | 1,688 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2022 | 9–13 | 40.9% | #72 | 1,679 | 0 | 5 | 2022 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #1031 | 1,680 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 2023 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #344 | 1,682 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 2024 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #229 | 1,607 | 0 | 5 | 2024 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #382 | 1,632 | 0 | 1 |