H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 04:32 UTC
Anna-Lena Friedsam vs Jana Cepelova H2H: 1-1
Anna-Lena Friedsam and Jana Cepelova are tied 1–1 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on hard courts. Most recently, Anna-Lena Friedsam won the 2014 Linz fourth round 6-0 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.
GER
Age 32
Right-Handed
174 cm / 5'9"
H2H
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
SVK
Age 33
Right-Handed
168 cm / 5'6"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 10, 2014* | Linz | WTA 500 | R16 | Hard | Anna-Lena Friedsam | 6-0 6-4 | Jana Cepelova | Match data |
| Jan 3, 2014* | Shenzhen | WTA 250 | R16 | Hard | Jana Cepelova | 6-4 6-1 | Anna-Lena Friedsam | 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-Lena Friedsam | #227 | #45 | 1,160 | 1,740 | 61 | 83 | 42.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jana Cepelova | #894 | #50 | 1,074 | 1,685 | 55 | 91 | 37.7% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
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-Lena Friedsam | Jana Cepelova | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2011 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #201 | 1,486 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2012 | 5–5 | 50.0% | #111 | 1,536 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2014 | 7–10 | 41.2% | #85 | 1,540 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 7–14 | 33.3% | #76 | 1,511 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2015 | 11–14 | 44.0% | #95 | 1,583 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 18–19 | 48.6% | #56 | 1,600 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2016 | 15–14 | 51.7% | #67 | 1,648 | 0 | 0 | 2015 | 5–10 | 33.3% | #147 | 1,575 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2017 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #507 | 1,604 | 0 | 0 | 2016 | 9–12 | 42.9% | #100 | 1,634 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2018 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #483 | 1,597 | 0 | 0 | 2017 | 8–20 | 28.6% | #108 | 1,638 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2019 | 7–9 | 43.8% | #145 | 1,658 | 0 | 0 | 2018 | 2–5 | 28.6% | #188 | 1,631 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2020 | 5–4 | 55.6% | #111 | 1,648 | 0 | 0 | 2019 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #158 | 1,621 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2021 | 4–10 | 28.6% | #140 | 1,557 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 2022 | 4–3 | 57.1% | #120 | 1,687 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 2023 | 7–15 | 31.8% | #135 | 1,585 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 2025 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #154 | 1,649 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |