H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Amy Frazier vs Leila Meskhi H2H: 2-1
Amy Frazier holds a 2–1 lead over Leila Meskhi in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on hard courts, while Amy Frazier leads 1–0 on carpet. Most recently, Amy Frazier won the 1991 Chicago third round 6-2 6-7 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.
USA
Age 53
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H
2
–
1
3 main draw meetings
GEO
Age 58
Right-Handed
164 cm / 5'5"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 14, 1991* | Chicago | WTA 250 | R32 | Carpet | Amy Frazier | 6-2 6-7 6-4 | Leila Meskhi | Match data |
| Nov 2, 1989* | Indianapolis | WTA 250 | R32 | Hard | Amy Frazier | 6-4 6-7 6-3 | Leila Meskhi | Match data |
| Mar 4, 1989* | Oklahoma | WTA 250 | QF | Hard | Leila Meskhi | 6-2 7-6 | Amy Frazier | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Amy Frazier | #450 | #13 | 1,381 | 1,959 | 416 | 307 | 57.5% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 5 | 8 |
| Leila Meskhi | #903 | #12 | 72 | 2,001 | 192 | 119 | 61.7% | 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 | Amy Frazier | Leila Meskhi | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 14 | 1987 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #147 | 1,527 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 15 | 1988 | 12–15 | 44.4% | #58 | 1,638 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 16 | 1989 | 23–15 | 60.5% | #33 | 1,725 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 1990 | 31–14 | 68.9% | #16 | 1,893 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 1991 | 25–18 | 58.1% | #28 | 1,813 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 1992 | 33–17 | 66.0% | #19 | 1,842 | 0 | 3 | 1987 | 11–7 | 61.1% | #46 | 1,655 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1993 | 10–9 | 52.6% | #39 | 1,843 | 0 | 3 | 1988 | 17–17 | 50.0% | #46 | 1,688 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1994 | 28–15 | 65.1% | #16 | 1,903 | 0 | 4 | 1989 | 21–14 | 60.0% | #30 | 1,794 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 1995 | 26–15 | 63.4% | #18 | 1,877 | 0 | 5 | 1990 | 38–14 | 73.1% | #19 | 1,928 | 0 | 3 |
| 23 | 1996 | 20–16 | 55.6% | #33 | 1,835 | 0 | 5 | 1991 | 30–14 | 68.2% | #15 | 1,937 | 0 | 4 |
| 24 | 1997 | 17–17 | 50.0% | #37 | 1,818 | 0 | 5 | 1992 | 26–15 | 63.4% | #22 | 1,939 | 0 | 4 |
| 25 | 1998 | 12–13 | 48.0% | #42 | 1,766 | 0 | 5 | 1993 | 22–17 | 56.4% | #37 | 1,874 | 0 | 4 |
| 26 | 1999 | 31–19 | 62.0% | #19 | 1,876 | 0 | 6 | 1994 | 22–15 | 59.5% | #34 | 1,843 | 0 | 4 |
| 27 | 2000 | 30–22 | 57.7% | #20 | 1,852 | 0 | 6 | 1995 | 5–2 | 71.4% | #141 | 1,834 | 0 | 5 |
| 28 | 2001 | 19–19 | 50.0% | #48 | 1,695 | 0 | 6 | 1996 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #838 | 1,748 | 0 | 5 |
| 29 | 2002 | 19–18 | 51.4% | #39 | 1,757 | 0 | 6 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 2003 | 14–13 | 51.9% | #61 | 1,746 | 0 | 6 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 2004 | 35–17 | 67.3% | #26 | 1,828 | 0 | 7 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 2005 | 18–16 | 52.9% | #52 | 1,730 | 0 | 8 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 2006 | 10–15 | 40.0% | #130 | 1,626 | 0 | 8 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |