H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Ana Ivanovic vs Gisela Dulko H2H: 2-1
Ana Ivanovic holds a 2–1 lead over Gisela Dulko in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on hard courts, while Ana Ivanovic leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Gisela Dulko won the 2010 Australian Open second round 6-7(6) 7-5 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.
SRB
Age 38
Right-Handed
184 cm / 6'0"
H2H
2
–
1
3 main draw meetings
ARG
Age 41
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 21, 2010* | Australian Open | Grand Slam | R64 | Hard | Gisela Dulko | 6-7(6) 7-5 6-4 | Ana Ivanovic | Match data |
| Mar 12, 2009* | Indian Wells | WTA 1000 | R32 | Hard | Ana Ivanovic | 6-3 6-3 | Gisela Dulko | Match data |
| Apr 12, 2007* | Charleston | WTA 1000 | R32 | Clay | Ana Ivanovic | 6-0 6-7(5) 6-4 | Gisela Dulko | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ana Ivanovic | #63 | #1 | 6,912 | 2,095 | 419 | 213 | 66.3% | 1 | 3 | 2 | 7 | 2 | 15 |
| Gisela Dulko | #305 | #26 | 1,695 | 1,798 | 192 | 179 | 51.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 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 | Ana Ivanovic | Gisela Dulko | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | 2004 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #101 | 1,544 | 0 | 0 | 2001 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #188 | 1,488 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 2005 | 32–14 | 69.6% | #16 | 1,847 | 0 | 1 | 2002 | 4–3 | 57.1% | #154 | 1,528 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2006 | 36–18 | 66.7% | #14 | 1,900 | 0 | 2 | 2003 | 5–7 | 41.7% | #125 | 1,516 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2007 | 49–17 | 74.2% | #4 | 2,034 | 0 | 5 | 2004 | 22–18 | 55.0% | #33 | 1,713 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2008 | 38–16 | 70.4% | #5 | 1,975 | 1 | 8 | 2005 | 32–23 | 58.2% | #26 | 1,726 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2009 | 22–14 | 61.1% | #21 | 1,825 | 1 | 8 | 2006 | 16–23 | 41.0% | #59 | 1,573 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2010 | 33–18 | 64.7% | #17 | 1,938 | 1 | 10 | 2007 | 29–23 | 55.8% | #37 | 1,702 | 0 | 2 |
| 23 | 2011 | 32–20 | 61.5% | #22 | 1,877 | 1 | 11 | 2008 | 18–20 | 47.4% | #51 | 1,658 | 0 | 3 |
| 24 | 2012 | 33–18 | 64.7% | #13 | 1,872 | 1 | 11 | 2009 | 28–20 | 58.3% | #36 | 1,734 | 0 | 3 |
| 25 | 2013 | 38–23 | 62.3% | #16 | 1,855 | 1 | 11 | 2010 | 21–21 | 50.0% | #48 | 1,686 | 0 | 3 |
| 26 | 2014 | 59–18 | 76.6% | #5 | 2,019 | 1 | 15 | 2011 | 15–15 | 50.0% | #67 | 1,650 | 0 | 4 |
| 27 | 2015 | 29–19 | 60.4% | #16 | 1,857 | 1 | 15 | 2012 | 2–5 | 28.6% | #305 | 1,604 | 0 | 4 |
| 28 | 2016 | 15–14 | 51.7% | #63 | 1,702 | 1 | 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |