H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 17:48 UTC
Barbora Strycova vs Vania King H2H: 3-1
Barbora Strycova holds a 3–1 lead over Vania King in their WTA head-to-head. Across 4 main-draw meetings, Barbora Strycova leads 3–1 on hard courts. Most recently, Barbora Strycova won the 2016 Australian Open second round 7-6 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.
CZE
Age 40
Right-Handed
164 cm / 5'5"
H2H
3
–
1
4 main draw meetings
USA
Age 37
Right-Handed
165 cm / 5'5"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 21, 2016* | Australian Open | Grand Slam | R64 | Hard | Barbora Strycova | 7-6 6-4 | Vania King | Match data |
| Mar 4, 2014* | Indian Wells | WTA 1000 | R128 | Hard | Barbora Strycova | 6-0 3-6 6-2 | Vania King | Match data |
| Jan 4, 2014* | Shenzhen | WTA 250 | QF | Hard | Vania King | 6-2 6-4 | Barbora Strycova | Match data |
| Oct 11, 2013* | Osaka | WTA 250 | R16 | Hard | Barbora Strycova | 2-6 6-3 6-1 | Vania King | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Barbora Strycova | #430 | #16 | 2,295 | 1,888 | 286 | 297 | 49.1% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| Vania King | #824 | #50 | 1,225 | 1,760 | 128 | 160 | 44.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 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 | Vania King | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2005 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #164 | 1,520 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 2003 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #142 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 16–13 | 55.2% | #60 | 1,661 | 0 | 1 |
| 18 | 2004 | 14–15 | 48.3% | #57 | 1,562 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 15–21 | 41.7% | #109 | 1,608 | 0 | 1 |
| 19 | 2005 | 8–15 | 34.8% | #137 | 1,490 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 7–19 | 26.9% | #128 | 1,512 | 0 | 1 |
| 20 | 2006 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #168 | 1,477 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 11–12 | 47.8% | #80 | 1,588 | 0 | 1 |
| 21 | 2007 | 2–5 | 28.6% | #151 | 1,456 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 14–17 | 45.2% | #86 | 1,595 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 2008 | 5–9 | 35.7% | #75 | 1,512 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 13–14 | 48.1% | #76 | 1,689 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 2009 | 13–20 | 39.4% | #66 | 1,524 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 15–19 | 44.1% | #69 | 1,614 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 2010 | 16–22 | 42.1% | #67 | 1,591 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 8–11 | 42.1% | #85 | 1,630 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 2011 | 24–26 | 48.0% | #44 | 1,631 | 0 | 1 | 2014 | 13–15 | 46.4% | #111 | 1,641 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2012 | 13–21 | 38.2% | #89 | 1,564 | 0 | 1 | 2015 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #410 | 1,627 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2013 | 5–6 | 45.5% | #94 | 1,584 | 0 | 1 | 2016 | 13–11 | 54.2% | #78 | 1,643 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2014 | 29–23 | 55.8% | #25 | 1,750 | 0 | 1 | 2017 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #492 | 1,590 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 2015 | 31–26 | 54.4% | #42 | 1,710 | 0 | 1 | 2018 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #356 | 1,559 | 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 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |