H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Anastasia Rodionova vs Iroda Tulyaganova H2H: 0-1
Iroda Tulyaganova holds a 1–0 lead over Anastasia Rodionova in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Iroda Tulyaganova leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Iroda Tulyaganova won the 2001 Tashkent third round 6-2 6-2.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
AUS
Age 44
Right-Handed
167 cm / 5'6"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
UZB
Age 44
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 14, 2001* | Tashkent | WTA 250 | R32 | Hard | Iroda Tulyaganova | 6-2 6-2 | Anastasia Rodionova | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Anastasia Rodionova | #872 | #62 | 1,095 | 1,649 | 86 | 150 | 36.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Iroda Tulyaganova | #862 | #16 | 1,349 | 1,820 | 93 | 80 | 53.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
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 | Anastasia Rodionova | Iroda Tulyaganova | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1999 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #186 | 1,472 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2000 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #239 | 1,491 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 11–8 | 57.9% | #75 | 1,578 | 0 | 1 |
| 19 | 2001 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #195 | 1,468 | 0 | 0 | 2001 | 30–23 | 56.6% | #20 | 1,719 | 0 | 3 |
| 20 | 2002 | 5–3 | 62.5% | #118 | 1,521 | 0 | 0 | 2002 | 19–21 | 47.5% | #55 | 1,654 | 0 | 3 |
| 21 | 2003 | 7–8 | 46.7% | #165 | 1,546 | 0 | 0 | 2003 | 23–17 | 57.5% | #50 | 1,734 | 0 | 3 |
| 22 | 2004 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #212 | 1,530 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #550 | 1,722 | 0 | 3 |
| 23 | 2005 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #140 | 1,517 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #371 | 1,705 | 0 | 3 |
| 24 | 2006 | 10–15 | 40.0% | #94 | 1,526 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 7–2 | 77.8% | #131 | 1,719 | 0 | 3 |
| 25 | 2007 | 11–20 | 35.5% | #78 | 1,525 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #318 | 1,644 | 0 | 3 |
| 26 | 2008 | 8–20 | 28.6% | #98 | 1,503 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #728 | 1,633 | 0 | 3 |
| 27 | 2009 | 5–9 | 35.7% | #95 | 1,522 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 2010 | 17–20 | 45.9% | #64 | 1,606 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 2011 | 8–21 | 27.6% | #108 | 1,573 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 2012 | 6–13 | 31.6% | #139 | 1,539 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 2013 | 2–7 | 22.2% | #162 | 1,502 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 2014 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #185 | 1,514 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 2015 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #235 | 1,509 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 34 | 2016 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #797 | 1,476 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 35 | 2017 | 2–1 | 66.7% | #390 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |