H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 16:32 UTC
Anastasija Sevastova vs Nuria Llagostera Vives H2H: 1-0
Anastasija Sevastova holds a 1–0 lead over Nuria Llagostera Vives in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Anastasija Sevastova leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Anastasija Sevastova won the 2010 Indian Wells first round 6-2 3-6 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.
LAT
Age 36
Right-Handed
169 cm / 5'7"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
ESP
Age 46
Right-Handed
156 cm / 5'1"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 9, 2010* | Indian Wells | WTA 1000 | R128 | Hard | Anastasija Sevastova | 6-2 3-6 6-1 | Nuria Llagostera Vives | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Anastasija Sevastova | #293 | #11 | 3,366 | 1,946 | 207 | 175 | 54.2% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 4 |
| Nuria Llagostera Vives | #775 | #35 | 968 | 1,685 | 77 | 110 | 41.2% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
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 | Anastasija Sevastova | Nuria Llagostera Vives | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 2007 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #261 | 1,510 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 2009 | 5–9 | 35.7% | #79 | 1,532 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 2010 | 22–15 | 59.5% | #45 | 1,718 | 0 | 1 | 2000 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #128 | 1,510 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2011 | 12–18 | 40.0% | #98 | 1,628 | 0 | 1 | 2001 | 8–12 | 40.0% | #103 | 1,499 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2012 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #184 | 1,610 | 0 | 1 | 2002 | 1–8 | 11.1% | #192 | 1,441 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2013 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #148 | 1,622 | 0 | 1 | 2003 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #140 | 1,448 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2004 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #76 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2015 | 5–3 | 62.5% | #113 | 1,654 | 0 | 1 | 2005 | 20–19 | 51.3% | #50 | 1,620 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2016 | 22–19 | 53.7% | #34 | 1,715 | 0 | 1 | 2006 | 6–5 | 54.5% | #275 | 1,626 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2017 | 37–24 | 60.7% | #16 | 1,820 | 0 | 2 | 2007 | 5–10 | 33.3% | #145 | 1,557 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2018 | 42–21 | 66.7% | #11 | 1,909 | 0 | 3 | 2008 | 13–10 | 56.5% | #68 | 1,620 | 0 | 2 |
| 29 | 2019 | 27–21 | 56.2% | #27 | 1,759 | 0 | 4 | 2009 | 8–16 | 33.3% | #146 | 1,559 | 0 | 2 |
| 30 | 2020 | 1–9 | 10.0% | #54 | 1,649 | 0 | 4 | 2010 | 4–7 | 36.4% | #127 | 1,564 | 0 | 2 |
| 31 | 2021 | 17–17 | 50.0% | #70 | 1,739 | 0 | 4 | 2011 | 3–9 | 25.0% | #131 | 1,548 | 0 | 2 |
| 32 | 2022 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #680 | 1,722 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 34 | 2024 | 4–2 | 66.7% | #481 | 1,728 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 35 | 2025 | 9–11 | 45.0% | #188 | 1,730 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |