H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 08:25 UTC
Camila Giorgi vs Tamira Paszek H2H: 0-1
Tamira Paszek holds a 1–0 lead over Camila Giorgi in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Tamira Paszek leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Tamira Paszek won the 2012 Tokyo second round 6-4 6-3.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
ITA
Age 34
Right-Handed
168 cm / 5'6"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
Age 35
Right-Handed
165 cm / 5'5"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 26, 2012* | Tokyo | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard | Tamira Paszek | 6-4 6-3 | Camila Giorgi | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Camila Giorgi | #116 | #26 | 1,978 | 1,875 | 204 | 184 | 52.6% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 4 |
| Tamira Paszek | — | — | — | 1,801 | 99 | 128 | 43.6% | 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 | Camila Giorgi | Tamira Paszek | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 14 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2005 | 1–1 | 50.0% | — | 1,512 | 0 | 0 |
| 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2006 | 6–2 | 75.0% | — | 1,598 | 0 | 1 |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2007 | 15–14 | 51.7% | — | 1,730 | 0 | 1 |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2008 | 16–18 | 47.1% | — | 1,697 | 0 | 1 |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2009 | 5–9 | 35.7% | — | 1,626 | 0 | 1 |
| 19 | 2011 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #151 | 1,486 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 9–9 | 50.0% | — | 1,641 | 0 | 2 |
| 20 | 2012 | 6–10 | 37.5% | #75 | 1,524 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 19–21 | 47.5% | — | 1,664 | 0 | 2 |
| 21 | 2013 | 8–11 | 42.1% | #98 | 1,579 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 18–20 | 47.4% | — | 1,687 | 0 | 3 |
| 22 | 2014 | 27–19 | 58.7% | #34 | 1,710 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 2–17 | 10.5% | — | 1,483 | 0 | 3 |
| 23 | 2015 | 26–21 | 55.3% | #35 | 1,730 | 0 | 1 | 2014 | 1–4 | 20.0% | — | 1,475 | 0 | 3 |
| 24 | 2016 | 14–19 | 42.4% | #82 | 1,638 | 0 | 1 | 2015 | 1–4 | 20.0% | — | 1,447 | 0 | 3 |
| 25 | 2017 | 15–12 | 55.6% | #78 | 1,778 | 0 | 1 | 2016 | 6–9 | 40.0% | — | 1,498 | 0 | 3 |
| 26 | 2018 | 28–15 | 65.1% | #26 | 1,865 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 27 | 2019 | 12–15 | 44.4% | #100 | 1,725 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 2020 | 10–9 | 52.6% | #76 | 1,726 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 2021 | 21–16 | 56.8% | #33 | 1,799 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 2022 | 14–16 | 46.7% | #66 | 1,763 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 2023 | 20–15 | 57.1% | #53 | 1,788 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 2024 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #116 | 1,760 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |