H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Cagla Buyukakcay vs Alison Riske-Amritraj H2H: 0-1
Alison Riske-Amritraj holds a 1–0 lead over Cagla Buyukakcay in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Alison Riske-Amritraj leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Alison Riske-Amritraj won the 2014 Tianjin third round 6-2 7-5.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
TUR
Age 36
Right-Handed
172 cm / 5'8"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
USA
Age 36
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 9, 2014* | Tianjin | WTA 250 | R32 | Hard | Alison Riske-Amritraj | 6-2 7-5 | Cagla Buyukakcay | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cagla Buyukakcay | #373 | #60 | 980 | 1,613 | 22 | 52 | 29.7% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Alison Riske-Amritraj | #1,157 | #18 | 2,360 | 1,853 | 191 | 202 | 48.6% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 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 | Cagla Buyukakcay | Alison Riske-Amritraj | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 15 | 2005 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,483 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 2008 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #388 | 1,468 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 2009 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #280 | 1,456 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 4–4 | 50.0% | #115 | 1,554 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2010 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #191 | 1,447 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 3–8 | 27.3% | #136 | 1,529 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2012 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #180 | 1,488 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2013 | 11–6 | 64.7% | #57 | 1,642 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2013 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #158 | 1,438 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 24–22 | 52.2% | #43 | 1,713 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 2014 | 3–6 | 33.3% | #137 | 1,443 | 0 | 0 | 2015 | 15–24 | 38.5% | #97 | 1,602 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 2015 | 2–8 | 20.0% | #126 | 1,422 | 0 | 0 | 2016 | 23–19 | 54.8% | #39 | 1,742 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2016 | 12–11 | 52.2% | #83 | 1,534 | 0 | 1 | 2017 | 21–24 | 46.7% | #70 | 1,650 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2017 | 4–10 | 28.6% | #160 | 1,517 | 0 | 1 | 2018 | 17–16 | 51.5% | #62 | 1,632 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2018 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #264 | 1,525 | 0 | 1 | 2019 | 26–23 | 53.1% | #18 | 1,797 | 0 | 2 |
| 29 | 2019 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #179 | 1,534 | 0 | 1 | 2020 | 6–8 | 42.9% | #26 | 1,739 | 0 | 2 |
| 30 | 2020 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #178 | 1,560 | 0 | 1 | 2021 | 16–15 | 51.6% | #51 | 1,771 | 0 | 3 |
| 31 | 2021 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #241 | 1,514 | 0 | 1 | 2022 | 25–21 | 54.3% | #41 | 1,750 | 0 | 3 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2023 | 0–8 | 0.0% | #659 | 1,614 | 0 | 3 |
| 33 | 2023 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #382 | 1,472 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |