H2H data updated: 2026-09-13 00:00 UTC
Amélie Mauresmo holds a 3–2 lead over Daja Bedanova in their WTA head-to-head. Across 5 main-draw meetings, Amélie Mauresmo leads 2–1 on hard courts, while they are tied 1–1 on carpet. Most recently, Amélie Mauresmo won the 2002 Antwerp quarterfinal 6-4 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.
| Player | Score | Player | Match Data | Date | Round | Tournament | Category | Surface |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Amélie Mauresmo | 6-4 7-5 | Daja Bedanova | Match data | Feb 16, 2002* | QF | Antwerp | Tier II → modern equivalent WTA 500 | Carpet |
| Amélie Mauresmo | 6-3 7-6(6) | Daja Bedanova | Match data | Jan 9, 2002* | R32 | Sydney International | Tier II → modern equivalent WTA 500 | Hard |
| Amélie Mauresmo | 6-3 6-1 | Daja Bedanova | Match data | Oct 11, 2001* | R32 | Porsche Tennis Grand Prix | Tier II → modern equivalent WTA 500 | Hard |
| Daja Bedanova | 6-2 6-7(6) 6-4 | Amélie Mauresmo | Match data | Oct 5, 2001* | R16 | Moscow | Tier I → modern equivalent WTA 1000 | Carpet |
| Daja Bedanova | 5-7 6-3 6-3 | Amélie Mauresmo | Match data | Oct 6, 2000* | R16 | Toyota Princess Cup | Tier II → modern equivalent WTA 500 | Hard |
Estimated match date where the exact historical date is unavailable. Arrows show an edition's recorded category and documented modern equivalent; unresolved editions keep their recorded category. Asterisked totals include editions mapped from documented historical predecessor categories. Mapping details.
| Player | Current | Peak | Pts | Elo | W | L | Win % | GS | 1000 including documented historical predecessor categories | Finals | 500 including documented historical predecessor categories | 250 including documented historical predecessor categories | Titles |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Amélie Mauresmo | #21 | #1 | 4,992 | 2,225 | 463 | 185 | 71.5% | 2 | 6 | 1 | 15 | 1 | 25 |
| Daja Bedanova | #998 | #16 | 1,323 | 1,806 | 65 | 72 | 47.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
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 | Amélie Mauresmo | Daja Bedanova | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 15 | 1995 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #250 | 1,488 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 16 | 1996 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #180 | 1,522 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #295 | 1,522 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 1997 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #100 | 1,556 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 13–9 | 59.1% | #53 | 1,698 | 0 | 1 |
| 18 | 1998 | 20–18 | 52.6% | #29 | 1,728 | 0 | 0 | 2001 | 20–20 | 50.0% | #28 | 1,772 | 0 | 1 |
| 19 | 1999 | 32–14 | 69.6% | #10 | 1,911 | 0 | 1 | 2002 | 24–25 | 49.0% | #37 | 1,718 | 0 | 1 |
| 20 | 2000 | 26–13 | 66.7% | #16 | 1,906 | 0 | 2 | 2003 | 6–15 | 28.6% | #155 | 1,597 | 0 | 1 |
| 21 | 2001 | 43–12 | 78.2% | #9 | 2,022 | 0 | 6 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 22 | 2002 | 45–15 | 75.0% | #6 | 2,061 | 0 | 8 | 2005 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #295 | 1,600 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 2003 | 45–17 | 72.6% | #4 | 2,065 | 0 | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 24 | 2004 | 61–12 | 83.6% | #2 | 2,178 | 0 | 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 25 | 2005 | 53–16 | 76.8% | #3 | 2,133 | 0 | 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 26 | 2006 | 50–14 | 78.1% | #3 | 2,165 | 2 | 23 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 27 | 2007 | 27–14 | 65.9% | #18 | 1,972 | 2 | 24 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 2008 | 30–19 | 61.2% | #24 | 1,820 | 2 | 24 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 2009 | 25–12 | 67.6% | #21 | 1,873 | 2 | 25 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
Seasons are aligned by the age each player spent most of that calendar year. Results cover completed main-draw matches. Bold green marks the higher win percentage when both players have at least 5 matches on that surface at the aligned age.
| Age | Amélie Mauresmo | Daja Bedanova | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | Hard | Clay | Grass | Carpet | Yr | Hard | Clay | Grass | Carpet | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| W | L | M | Win % | W | L | M | Win % | W | L | M | Win % | W | L | M | Win % | W | L | M | Win % | W | L | M | Win % | W | L | M | Win % | W | L | M | Win % | |||
| 15 | 1995 | — | — | — | — | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0.0% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 16 | 1996 | — | — | — | — | 1 | 1 | 2 | 50.0% | 1 | 1 | 2 | 50.0% | — | — | — | — | 1999 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1 | 1 | 2 | 50.0% |
| 17 | 1997 | — | — | — | — | 3 | 3 | 6 | 50.0% | — | — | — | — | 1 | 3 | 4 | 25.0% | 2000 | 12 | 7 | 19 | 63.2% | 1 | 1 | 2 | 50.0% | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0.0% | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 1998 | 9 | 7 | 16 | 56.3% | 8 | 6 | 14 | 57.1% | 1 | 2 | 3 | 33.3% | 2 | 3 | 5 | 40.0% | 2001 | 16 | 13 | 29 | 55.2% | 2 | 1 | 3 | 66.7% | 0 | 3 | 3 | 0.0% | 2 | 3 | 5 | 40.0% |
| 19 | 1999 | 19 | 7 | 26 | 73.1% | 7 | 4 | 11 | 63.6% | — | — | — | — | 6 | 3 | 9 | 66.7% | 2002 | 13 | 14 | 27 | 48.1% | 2 | 4 | 6 | 33.3% | 7 | 3 | 10 | 70.0% | 2 | 4 | 6 | 33.3% |
| 20 | 2000 | 8 | 5 | 13 | 61.5% | 13 | 4 | 17 | 76.5% | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0.0% | 5 | 3 | 8 | 62.5% | 2003 | 3 | 6 | 9 | 33.3% | 2 | 5 | 7 | 28.6% | 1 | 2 | 3 | 33.3% | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0.0% |
| 21 | 2001 | 15 | 7 | 22 | 68.2% | 16 | 3 | 19 | 84.2% | 2 | 1 | 3 | 66.7% | 10 | 1 | 11 | 90.9% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 22 | 2002 | 25 | 5 | 30 | 83.3% | 7 | 5 | 12 | 58.3% | 7 | 2 | 9 | 77.8% | 6 | 3 | 9 | 66.7% | 2005 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 50.0% | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0.0% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 23 | 2003 | 23 | 11 | 34 | 67.6% | 15 | 3 | 18 | 83.3% | 1 | 1 | 2 | 50.0% | 6 | 2 | 8 | 75.0% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 24 | 2004 | 35 | 7 | 42 | 83.3% | 19 | 3 | 22 | 86.4% | 7 | 2 | 9 | 77.8% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 25 | 2005 | 36 | 10 | 46 | 78.3% | 9 | 2 | 11 | 81.8% | 5 | 2 | 7 | 71.4% | 3 | 2 | 5 | 60.0% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 26 | 2006 | 32 | 10 | 42 | 76.2% | 6 | 2 | 8 | 75.0% | 7 | 1 | 8 | 87.5% | 5 | 1 | 6 | 83.3% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 27 | 2007 | 13 | 7 | 20 | 65.0% | 6 | 4 | 10 | 60.0% | 6 | 2 | 8 | 75.0% | 2 | 1 | 3 | 66.7% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 2008 | 21 | 14 | 35 | 60.0% | 4 | 2 | 6 | 66.7% | 3 | 2 | 5 | 60.0% | 2 | 1 | 3 | 66.7% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 2009 | 12 | 7 | 19 | 63.2% | 4 | 3 | 7 | 57.1% | 4 | 2 | 6 | 66.7% | 5 | 0 | 5 | 100.0% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Career | — | 248 | 97 | 345 | 71.9% | 118 | 46 | 164 | 72.0% | 44 | 19 | 63 | 69.8% | 53 | 23 | 76 | 69.7% | — | 45 | 41 | 86 | 52.3% | 7 | 12 | 19 | 36.8% | 8 | 9 | 17 | 47.1% | 5 | 10 | 15 | 33.3% |
Seasons are aligned by the age each player spent most of that calendar year. Metrics use eligible main-draw results; point statistics use matches with detailed data. Bold green marks the stronger value when both underlying samples are sufficient. Lower is better for Schedule because a negative value means a tougher schedule. Career Schedule is normalized per 100 matches.
| Age | Amélie Mauresmo | Daja Bedanova | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | Elo | P+ | Serve+ | Return+ | PD | TPW% | Hard Elo | Clay Elo | Grass Elo | Set Win % | Set Margin | Dec. Set | Tiebreak | Pressure+ | Schedule | Yr | Elo | P+ | Serve+ | Return+ | PD | TPW% | Hard Elo | Clay Elo | Grass Elo | Set Win % | Set Margin | Dec. Set | Tiebreak | Pressure+ | Schedule | |
| 15 | 1995 | 1488 | 98.9 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 33.3% | -1.00 | 0–1 | — | — | +0.12 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 16 | 1996 | 1523 | 102.5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 50.0% | -0.20 | 1–1 | — | — | +0.03 | 1999 | 1522 | 117.6 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 50.0% | -0.50 | — | — | — | -0.06 |
| 17 | 1997 | 1556 | 126.4 | — | — | — | — | -24 | +36 | — | 48.0% | -0.08 | 1–4 (20%) | 1–2 (33%) | 97.2 | -0.06 | 2000 | 1698 | 131.5 | — | — | — | — | +23 | — | — | 51.9% | +0.15 | 8–2 (80%) | 2–1 (67%) | 110.6 | +0.15 |
| 18 | 1998 | 1729 | 146.0 | — | — | — | — | -83 | 0 | -114 | 51.2% | +0.12 | 5–3 (63%) | 5–4 (56%) | 107.0 | -0.59 | 2001 | 1772 | 151.8 | — | — | — | — | +15 | -200 | -253 | 50.5% | +0.27 | 9–8 (53%) | 3–11 (21%) | 96.7 | -2.29 |
| 19 | 1999 | 1912 | 159.1 | — | — | — | — | -27 | -138 | — | 61.2% | +0.73 | 12–5 (71%) | 5–5 (50%) | 109.0 | +1.67 | 2002 | 1718 | 137.2 | — | — | — | — | -23 | -139 | -7 | 49.1% | -0.08 | 10–10 (50%) | 6–6 (50%) | 98.1 | -0.10 |
| 20 | 2000 | 1907 | 163.5 | — | — | — | — | -30 | +17 | — | 64.6% | +1.38 | 5–7 (42%) | 4–7 (36%) | 93.9 | -1.71 | 2003 | 1597 | 114.3 | -0.44 | -1.19 | 0.806 | 45.7% | +21 | -39 | +82 | 33.3% | -1.21 | 2–4 (33%) | 0–2 | — | -0.74 |
| 21 | 2001 | 2023 | 167.1 | — | — | — | — | -34 | +99 | -402 | 70.7% | +1.41 | 14–3 (82%) | 10–3 (77%) | 113.0 | -2.74 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 22 | 2002 | 2062 | 162.6 | — | — | — | — | +32 | -20 | -255 | 74.0% | +1.75 | 6–7 (46%) | 10–5 (67%) | 98.8 | -0.13 | 2005 | 1600 | 108.4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 37.5% | -1.50 | 1–1 | 1–0 | — | -0.49 |
| 23 | 2003 | 2065 | 163.0 | +5.99 | +3.35 | 1.388 | 56.1% | +3 | +92 | — | 69.4% | +1.11 | 13–5 (72%) | 13–2 (87%) | 108.6 | -2.28 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 24 | 2004 | 2178 | 168.3 | +7.28 | +5.47 | 1.468 | 57.6% | +1 | +37 | -262 | 78.5% | +2.20 | 14–6 (70%) | 8–5 (62%) | 104.3 | -0.48 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 25 | 2005 | 2133 | 167.1 | +5.80 | +3.65 | 1.286 | 55.4% | +23 | +95 | -185 | 72.0% | +1.48 | 10–6 (63%) | 7–2 (78%) | 102.5 | -0.83 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 26 | 2006 | 2166 | 170.3 | +5.44 | +4.78 | 1.215 | 54.1% | +18 | +5 | -62 | 70.5% | +1.49 | 15–4 (79%) | 8–3 (73%) | 108.7 | -3.85 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 27 | 2007 | 1973 | 149.7 | +4.23 | +2.32 | 1.159 | 53.0% | +81 | +133 | +141 | 63.4% | +1.04 | 6–9 (40%) | 6–8 (43%) | 89.6 | -1.04 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 2008 | 1820 | 135.6 | +2.15 | +2.79 | 1.128 | 52.5% | +25 | +198 | +234 | 56.9% | +0.66 | 14–8 (64%) | 8–9 (47%) | 94.5 | +0.52 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 2009 | 1873 | 146.4 | +3.25 | +2.00 | 1.095 | 52.0% | +15 | +92 | +120 | 61.4% | +0.83 | 12–4 (75%) | 5–5 (50%) | 103.7 | -1.60 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Career | — | 2226 | 166.5 | +4.45 | +3.42 | 1.200 | 53.8% | +5 | +46 | -86 | 66.9% | +1.23 | 128–73 (64%) | 90–60 (60%) | 108.0 | -2.04 | — | 1807 | 141.8 | -0.44 | -1.19 | 0.806 | 45.7% | +4 | -107 | -36 | 47.3% | -0.15 | 30–25 (55%) | 12–20 (38%) | 100.2 | -2.60 |
Each player's five most-played main-draw opponents. The current matchup is highlighted when it appears in a player's top five.
| Opponent | W | L | M | Last Played | H2H |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Patty Schnyder | 13 | 5 | 18 | Aug 22, 2008 | H2H |
| Lindsay Davenport | 4 | 14 | 18 | Sep 23, 2006 | H2H |
| Elena Dementieva | 11 | 5 | 16 | May 14, 2009 | H2H |
| Kim Clijsters | 7 | 8 | 15 | Feb 18, 2007 | H2H |
| Justine Henin | 6 | 8 | 14 | Jun 24, 2007 | H2H |
| Opponent | W | L | M | Last Played | H2H |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lindsay Davenport | 0 | 5 | 5 | Apr 10, 2003 | H2H |
| Meghann Shaughnessy | 2 | 3 | 5 | Feb 27, 2003 | H2H |
| Amélie Mauresmo | 2 | 3 | 5 | Feb 16, 2002 | H2H |
| Nathalie Dechy | 0 | 4 | 4 | Jun 27, 2003 | H2H |
| Cara Black | 3 | 1 | 4 | Apr 9, 2003 | H2H |