H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Barbora Strycova vs Ana Konjuh H2H: 0-1
Ana Konjuh holds a 1–0 lead over Barbora Strycova in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Ana Konjuh leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Ana Konjuh won the 2016 Moscow third round 6-4 1-6 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.
CZE
Age 40
Right-Handed
164 cm / 5'5"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
CRO
Age 28
Right-Handed
174 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 18, 2016 | Moscow | WTA 500 | R32 | Hard | Ana Konjuh | 6-4 1-6 6-2 | Barbora Strycova | Match data |
Career Comparison
| Player | Current | Peak | Pts | Elo | W | L | Win % | GS | 1000 | Finals | 500 | 250 | Titles |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Barbora Strycova | #430 | #16 | 2,295 | 1,888 | 286 | 297 | 49.1% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| Ana Konjuh | #647 | #20 | 1,830 | 1,786 | 84 | 80 | 51.2% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
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 | Barbora Strycova | Ana Konjuh | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2014 | 8–6 | 57.1% | #93 | 1,611 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 2003 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #142 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 | 2015 | 11–9 | 55.0% | #82 | 1,658 | 0 | 1 |
| 18 | 2004 | 14–15 | 48.3% | #57 | 1,562 | 0 | 0 | 2016 | 17–12 | 58.6% | #47 | 1,688 | 0 | 1 |
| 19 | 2005 | 8–15 | 34.8% | #137 | 1,490 | 0 | 0 | 2017 | 22–18 | 55.0% | #44 | 1,716 | 0 | 1 |
| 20 | 2006 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #168 | 1,477 | 0 | 0 | 2018 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #385 | 1,686 | 0 | 1 |
| 21 | 2007 | 2–5 | 28.6% | #151 | 1,456 | 0 | 0 | 2019 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #1282 | 1,644 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 2008 | 5–9 | 35.7% | #75 | 1,512 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 23 | 2009 | 13–20 | 39.4% | #66 | 1,524 | 0 | 0 | 2021 | 17–14 | 54.8% | #67 | 1,690 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 2010 | 16–22 | 42.1% | #67 | 1,591 | 0 | 0 | 2022 | 8–14 | 36.4% | #108 | 1,642 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 2011 | 24–26 | 48.0% | #44 | 1,631 | 0 | 1 | 2023 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #407 | 1,583 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2012 | 13–21 | 38.2% | #89 | 1,564 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 27 | 2013 | 5–6 | 45.5% | #94 | 1,584 | 0 | 1 | 2025 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #647 | 1,464 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2014 | 29–23 | 55.8% | #25 | 1,750 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 2015 | 31–26 | 54.4% | #42 | 1,710 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 2016 | 35–23 | 60.3% | #20 | 1,791 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 2017 | 42–24 | 63.6% | #23 | 1,868 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 2018 | 23–22 | 51.1% | #33 | 1,765 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 2019 | 19–20 | 48.7% | #33 | 1,713 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 34 | 2020 | 5–9 | 35.7% | #37 | 1,680 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 35 | 2021 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #340 | 1,650 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 37 | 2023 | 2–7 | 22.2% | #430 | 1,602 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |