H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 04:32 UTC
Beatriz Haddad Maia vs Polona Hercog H2H: 1-0
Beatriz Haddad Maia holds a 1–0 lead over Polona Hercog in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Beatriz Haddad Maia leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Beatriz Haddad Maia won the 2015 Rio de Janeiro fourth round 6-1 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.
BRA
Age 30
Left-Handed
185 cm / 6'1"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
SLO
Age 35
Right-Handed
185 cm / 6'1"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 20, 2015* | Rio de Janeiro | WTA 250 | R16 | Clay | Beatriz Haddad Maia | 6-1 6-2 | Polona Hercog | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beatriz Haddad Maia | #153 | #10 | 3,194 | 1,944 | 147 | 135 | 52.1% | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 4 |
| Polona Hercog | #228 | #35 | 1,605 | 1,768 | 170 | 212 | 44.5% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 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 | Beatriz Haddad Maia | Polona Hercog | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2007 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #375 | 1,488 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 2013 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #299 | 1,501 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #245 | 1,470 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2014 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #239 | 1,475 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 6–8 | 42.9% | #68 | 1,501 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2015 | 3–2 | 60.0% | #246 | 1,508 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 26–24 | 52.0% | #47 | 1,671 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2016 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #174 | 1,460 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 27–25 | 51.9% | #36 | 1,699 | 0 | 1 |
| 21 | 2017 | 14–12 | 53.8% | #71 | 1,659 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 14–20 | 41.2% | #76 | 1,676 | 0 | 2 |
| 22 | 2018 | 5–9 | 35.7% | #183 | 1,581 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 10–10 | 50.0% | #65 | 1,701 | 0 | 2 |
| 23 | 2019 | 7–5 | 58.3% | #121 | 1,673 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 12–16 | 42.9% | #97 | 1,647 | 0 | 2 |
| 24 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2015 | 19–23 | 45.2% | #73 | 1,609 | 0 | 2 |
| 25 | 2021 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #83 | 1,635 | 0 | 0 | 2016 | 10–16 | 38.5% | #143 | 1,573 | 0 | 2 |
| 26 | 2022 | 34–21 | 61.8% | #15 | 1,847 | 0 | 2 | 2017 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #101 | 1,584 | 0 | 2 |
| 27 | 2023 | 32–21 | 60.4% | #11 | 1,893 | 0 | 3 | 2018 | 15–19 | 44.1% | #85 | 1,626 | 0 | 2 |
| 28 | 2024 | 33–24 | 57.9% | #17 | 1,895 | 0 | 4 | 2019 | 19–21 | 47.5% | #49 | 1,714 | 0 | 3 |
| 29 | 2025 | 16–22 | 42.1% | #58 | 1,769 | 0 | 4 | 2020 | 6–8 | 42.9% | #49 | 1,683 | 0 | 3 |
| 30 | 2026 | 0–11 | 0.0% | #153 | 1,537 | 0 | 4 | 2021 | 4–15 | 21.1% | #134 | 1,590 | 0 | 3 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2023 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #267 | 1,565 | 0 | 3 |
| 35 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2026 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #228 | 1,628 | 0 | 3 |