H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Anne Keothavong vs Lilia Osterloh H2H: 0-1
Lilia Osterloh holds a 1–0 lead over Anne Keothavong in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Lilia Osterloh leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Lilia Osterloh won the 2008 Cincinnati third round 7-6(3) 4-6 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.
GBR
Age 42
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
USA
Age 48
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 14, 2008* | Cincinnati | WTA 500 | R32 | Hard | Lilia Osterloh | 7-6(3) 4-6 6-4 | Anne Keothavong | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Anne Keothavong | #287 | #48 | 1,315 | 1,633 | 48 | 89 | 35.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Lilia Osterloh | #1,223 | #41 | 738 | 1,697 | 83 | 138 | 37.6% | 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 | Anne Keothavong | Lilia Osterloh | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 2001 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #271 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 2002 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #236 | 1,475 | 0 | 0 | 1996 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #195 | 1,518 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2003 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #177 | 1,464 | 0 | 0 | 1997 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #170 | 1,551 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2004 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #180 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 | 1998 | 0–5 | 0.0% | #120 | 1,501 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2005 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #236 | 1,467 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 9–13 | 40.9% | #79 | 1,545 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2006 | 0–7 | 0.0% | #144 | 1,400 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 15–19 | 44.1% | #43 | 1,595 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2007 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #132 | 1,425 | 0 | 0 | 2001 | 23–25 | 47.9% | #53 | 1,659 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2008 | 4–8 | 33.3% | #60 | 1,463 | 0 | 0 | 2002 | 7–18 | 28.0% | #156 | 1,535 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2009 | 13–15 | 46.4% | #100 | 1,539 | 0 | 0 | 2003 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #180 | 1,509 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2010 | 11–13 | 45.8% | #121 | 1,613 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 4–5 | 44.4% | #119 | 1,561 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2011 | 8–9 | 47.1% | #72 | 1,618 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 2–9 | 18.2% | #144 | 1,488 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2012 | 6–17 | 26.1% | #143 | 1,532 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 6–8 | 42.9% | #118 | 1,509 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2013 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #287 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 7–12 | 36.8% | #91 | 1,543 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2008 | 3–10 | 23.1% | #230 | 1,486 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2009 | 3–3 | 50.0% | #136 | 1,510 | 0 | 0 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2010 | 1–6 | 14.3% | #237 | 1,467 | 0 | 0 |