H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Amélie Mauresmo vs Paola Suarez H2H: 2-2
Amélie Mauresmo and Paola Suarez are tied 2–2 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 4 main-draw meetings, Paola Suarez leads 2–1 on clay, while Amélie Mauresmo leads 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Amélie Mauresmo won the 2004 Wimbledon quarterfinal 6-0 5-7 6-1.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
FRA
Age 47
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H
2
–
2
4 main draw meetings
ARG
Age 50
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 2, 2004* | Wimbledon | Grand Slam | QF | Grass | Amélie Mauresmo | 6-0 5-7 6-1 | Paola Suarez | Match data |
| Jun 4, 2002* | Roland Garros | Grand Slam | R16 | Clay | Paola Suarez | 6-2 2-6 6-4 | Amélie Mauresmo | Match data |
| May 19, 2001* | Rome | WTA 1000 | QF | Clay | Amélie Mauresmo | 6-4 7-5 | Paola Suarez | Match data |
| May 9, 2000* | Berlin | WTA 1000 | R32 | Clay | Paola Suarez | 4-6 6-3 6-4 | Amélie Mauresmo | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Amélie Mauresmo | #21 | #1 | 4,992 | 2,217 | 458 | 183 | 71.5% | 2 | 6 | 1 | 15 | 1 | 25 |
| Paola Suarez | #525 | #9 | 2,081 | 1,916 | 223 | 180 | 55.3% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 4 |
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 | Amélie Mauresmo | Paola Suarez | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 1997 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #100 | 1,555 | 0 | 0 | 1993 | 2–1 | 66.7% | #197 | 1,519 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 1998 | 20–18 | 52.6% | #29 | 1,729 | 0 | 0 | 1994 | 5–8 | 38.5% | #114 | 1,536 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1999 | 32–14 | 69.6% | #10 | 1,914 | 0 | 1 | 1995 | 2–6 | 25.0% | #122 | 1,522 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2000 | 26–12 | 68.4% | #16 | 1,932 | 0 | 2 | 1996 | 12–11 | 52.2% | #62 | 1,618 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2001 | 43–12 | 78.2% | #9 | 2,029 | 0 | 6 | 1997 | 6–16 | 27.3% | #118 | 1,556 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2002 | 45–15 | 75.0% | #6 | 2,060 | 0 | 8 | 1998 | 10–9 | 52.6% | #80 | 1,535 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 2003 | 45–17 | 72.6% | #4 | 2,061 | 0 | 10 | 1999 | 12–12 | 50.0% | #72 | 1,597 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 2004 | 56–11 | 83.6% | #2 | 2,175 | 0 | 15 | 2000 | 27–22 | 55.1% | #36 | 1,677 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 2005 | 53–16 | 76.8% | #3 | 2,127 | 0 | 19 | 2001 | 27–15 | 64.3% | #27 | 1,736 | 0 | 2 |
| 26 | 2006 | 50–14 | 78.1% | #3 | 2,135 | 2 | 23 | 2002 | 30–23 | 56.6% | #27 | 1,697 | 0 | 2 |
| 27 | 2007 | 27–14 | 65.9% | #18 | 1,960 | 2 | 24 | 2003 | 37–22 | 62.7% | #14 | 1,859 | 0 | 3 |
| 28 | 2008 | 30–19 | 61.2% | #24 | 1,815 | 2 | 24 | 2004 | 37–17 | 68.5% | #16 | 1,804 | 0 | 4 |
| 29 | 2009 | 25–12 | 67.6% | #21 | 1,871 | 2 | 25 | 2005 | 3–7 | 30.0% | #238 | 1,712 | 0 | 4 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2006 | 10–9 | 52.6% | #178 | 1,699 | 0 | 4 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2007 | 3–2 | 60.0% | #300 | 1,689 | 0 | 4 |