H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Chanda Rubin vs Jana Novotna H2H: 2-1
Chanda Rubin holds a 2–1 lead over Jana Novotna in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Chanda Rubin leads 1–0 on carpet and 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Jana Novotna won the 1998 New Haven fourth round 6-1 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.
USA
Age 50
Right-Handed
168 cm / 5'6"
H2H
2
–
1
3 main draw meetings
CZE
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 28, 1998* | New Haven | WTA 500 | R16 | Hard | Jana Novotna | 6-1 7-5 | Chanda Rubin | Match data |
| Feb 15, 1997* | Linz | WTA 500 | SF | Carpet | Chanda Rubin | 7-5 5-7 6-3 | Jana Novotna | Match data |
| Jun 4, 1995* | Roland Garros | Grand Slam | R32 | Clay | Chanda Rubin | 7-6(8) 4-6 8-6 | Jana Novotna | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chanda Rubin | #1,122 | #6 | 2,554 | 2,047 | 343 | 231 | 59.8% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 5 | 1 | 7 |
| Jana Novotna | #18 | #2 | 5,063 | 2,224 | 504 | 198 | 71.8% | 1 | 4 | 1 | 5 | 13 | 24 |
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 | Chanda Rubin | Jana Novotna | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 14 | 1990 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #526 | 1,489 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 15 | 1991 | 8–6 | 57.1% | #84 | 1,583 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 16 | 1992 | 10–15 | 40.0% | #84 | 1,617 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 1993 | 15–17 | 46.9% | #70 | 1,653 | 0 | 0 | 1986 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #171 | 1,466 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 1994 | 28–17 | 62.2% | #23 | 1,804 | 0 | 0 | 1987 | 21–17 | 55.3% | #47 | 1,752 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1995 | 38–19 | 66.7% | #15 | 1,945 | 0 | 0 | 1988 | 23–18 | 56.1% | #35 | 1,757 | 0 | 1 |
| 20 | 1996 | 20–9 | 69.0% | #17 | 1,989 | 0 | 0 | 1989 | 45–17 | 72.6% | #11 | 1,962 | 0 | 2 |
| 21 | 1997 | 23–20 | 53.5% | #32 | 1,814 | 0 | 1 | 1990 | 40–16 | 71.4% | #13 | 2,016 | 0 | 3 |
| 22 | 1998 | 20–19 | 51.3% | #35 | 1,800 | 0 | 1 | 1991 | 45–15 | 75.0% | #7 | 2,072 | 0 | 5 |
| 23 | 1999 | 33–20 | 62.3% | #22 | 1,843 | 0 | 2 | 1992 | 36–17 | 67.9% | #10 | 2,089 | 0 | 5 |
| 24 | 2000 | 42–22 | 65.6% | #13 | 1,910 | 0 | 3 | 1993 | 46–15 | 75.4% | #6 | 2,103 | 0 | 7 |
| 25 | 2001 | 16–16 | 50.0% | #52 | 1,806 | 0 | 3 | 1994 | 43–11 | 79.6% | #4 | 2,141 | 0 | 10 |
| 26 | 2002 | 29–11 | 72.5% | #13 | 1,958 | 0 | 5 | 1995 | 30–12 | 71.4% | #11 | 2,031 | 0 | 11 |
| 27 | 2003 | 43–20 | 68.3% | #9 | 1,917 | 0 | 7 | 1996 | 47–12 | 79.7% | #5 | 2,209 | 0 | 15 |
| 28 | 2004 | 16–10 | 61.5% | #52 | 1,860 | 0 | 7 | 1997 | 52–15 | 77.6% | #2 | 2,173 | 0 | 19 |
| 29 | 2005 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #545 | 1,823 | 0 | 7 | 1998 | 50–14 | 78.1% | #3 | 2,129 | 1 | 23 |
| 30 | 2006 | 1–7 | 12.5% | #486 | 1,719 | 0 | 7 | 1999 | 26–15 | 63.4% | #18 | 1,924 | 1 | 24 |