H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 08:25 UTC
Anna Chakvetadze vs Tamira Paszek H2H: 2-0
Anna Chakvetadze holds a 2–0 lead over Tamira Paszek in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Anna Chakvetadze leads 2–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Anna Chakvetadze won the 2008 Miami second round 6-3 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.
RUS
Age 39
Right-Handed
171 cm / 5'7"
H2H
2
–
0
2 main draw meetings
Age 35
Right-Handed
165 cm / 5'5"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 26, 2008* | Miami | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard | Anna Chakvetadze | 6-3 6-2 | Tamira Paszek | Match data |
| Sep 4, 2007* | US Open | Grand Slam | R16 | Hard | Anna Chakvetadze | 6-1 7-5 | Tamira Paszek | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Anna Chakvetadze | #577 | #5 | 2,940 | 2,067 | 183 | 135 | 57.5% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 5 | 2 | 8 |
| Tamira Paszek | — | — | — | 1,801 | 99 | 128 | 43.6% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 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 | Anna Chakvetadze | Tamira Paszek | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 14 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2005 | 1–1 | 50.0% | — | 1,512 | 0 | 0 |
| 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2006 | 6–2 | 75.0% | — | 1,598 | 0 | 1 |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2007 | 15–14 | 51.7% | — | 1,730 | 0 | 1 |
| 17 | 2004 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #83 | 1,526 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 16–18 | 47.1% | — | 1,697 | 0 | 1 |
| 18 | 2005 | 24–21 | 53.3% | #32 | 1,716 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 5–9 | 35.7% | — | 1,626 | 0 | 1 |
| 19 | 2006 | 37–20 | 64.9% | #13 | 1,936 | 0 | 2 | 2010 | 9–9 | 50.0% | — | 1,641 | 0 | 2 |
| 20 | 2007 | 56–19 | 74.7% | #6 | 1,984 | 0 | 6 | 2011 | 19–21 | 47.5% | — | 1,664 | 0 | 2 |
| 21 | 2008 | 26–23 | 53.1% | #18 | 1,721 | 0 | 7 | 2012 | 18–20 | 47.4% | — | 1,687 | 0 | 3 |
| 22 | 2009 | 14–18 | 43.8% | #67 | 1,711 | 0 | 7 | 2013 | 2–17 | 10.5% | — | 1,483 | 0 | 3 |
| 23 | 2010 | 18–15 | 54.5% | #56 | 1,715 | 0 | 8 | 2014 | 1–4 | 20.0% | — | 1,475 | 0 | 3 |
| 24 | 2011 | 3–8 | 27.3% | #234 | 1,641 | 0 | 8 | 2015 | 1–4 | 20.0% | — | 1,447 | 0 | 3 |
| 25 | 2012 | 3–8 | 27.3% | #224 | 1,557 | 0 | 8 | 2016 | 6–9 | 40.0% | — | 1,498 | 0 | 3 |