H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Conchita Martínez vs Chanda Rubin H2H: 8-3
Conchita Martínez holds a 8–3 lead over Chanda Rubin in their WTA head-to-head. Across 11 main-draw meetings, Conchita Martínez leads 4–1 on hard courts and 4–0 on clay. Most recently, Chanda Rubin won the 2003 Eastbourne final 6-4 3-6 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.
ESP
Age 54
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H
8
–
3
11 main draw meetings
USA
Age 50
Right-Handed
168 cm / 5'6"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 22, 2003* | Eastbourne | WTA 500 | F | Grass | Chanda Rubin | 6-4 3-6 6-4 | Conchita Martínez | Match data |
| Jun 22, 2001* | Eastbourne | WTA 500 | R16 | Grass | Chanda Rubin | 6-7(4) 7-5 6-0 | Conchita Martínez | Match data |
| Sep 1, 1999* | US Open | Grand Slam | R128 | Hard | Conchita Martínez | 6-2 6-3 | Chanda Rubin | Match data |
| Apr 9, 1999* | Amelia Island | WTA 250 | R16 | Clay | Conchita Martínez | 7-6 5-7 6-2 | Chanda Rubin | Match data |
| Mar 8, 1999* | Indian Wells | WTA 1000 | R32 | Hard | Chanda Rubin | 6-3 6-4 | Conchita Martínez | Match data |
| May 29, 1997* | Roland Garros | Grand Slam | R64 | Clay | Conchita Martínez | 6-3 6-0 | Chanda Rubin | Match data |
| May 8, 1997* | Rome | WTA 1000 | R32 | Clay | Conchita Martínez | 6-2 6-3 | Chanda Rubin | Match data |
| Apr 11, 1997* | Amelia Island | WTA 250 | R16 | Clay | Conchita Martínez | 6-3 6-3 | Chanda Rubin | Match data |
| Mar 11, 1997* | Indian Wells | WTA 1000 | R16 | Hard | Conchita Martínez | 6-1 1-6 7-5 | Chanda Rubin | Match data |
| Aug 13, 1995* | Manhattan Beach | WTA 250 | F | Hard | Conchita Martínez | 4-6 6-1 6-3 | Chanda Rubin | Match data |
| Jan 26, 1994* | Australian Open | Grand Slam | R16 | Hard | Conchita Martínez | 7-6(4) 6-3 | Chanda Rubin | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Conchita Martínez | #1,498 | #2 | 3,180 | 2,263 | 669 | 275 | 70.9% | 1 | 9 | 0 | 4 | 19 | 33 |
| Chanda Rubin | #1,122 | #6 | 2,554 | 2,047 | 343 | 231 | 59.8% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 5 | 1 | 7 |
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 | Conchita Martínez | Chanda Rubin | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1988 | 14–6 | 70.0% | #41 | 1,730 | 0 | 1 | 1992 | 10–15 | 40.0% | #84 | 1,617 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 1989 | 35–9 | 79.5% | #7 | 1,933 | 0 | 4 | 1993 | 15–17 | 46.9% | #70 | 1,653 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 1990 | 38–10 | 79.2% | #11 | 2,063 | 0 | 7 | 1994 | 28–17 | 62.2% | #23 | 1,804 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1991 | 36–12 | 75.0% | #9 | 2,076 | 0 | 10 | 1995 | 38–19 | 66.7% | #15 | 1,945 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1992 | 44–16 | 73.3% | #8 | 2,054 | 0 | 11 | 1996 | 20–9 | 69.0% | #17 | 1,989 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1993 | 66–13 | 83.5% | #4 | 2,158 | 0 | 16 | 1997 | 23–20 | 53.5% | #32 | 1,814 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 1994 | 51–14 | 78.5% | #3 | 2,065 | 1 | 20 | 1998 | 20–19 | 51.3% | #35 | 1,800 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 1995 | 57–10 | 85.1% | #2 | 2,182 | 1 | 26 | 1999 | 33–20 | 62.3% | #22 | 1,843 | 0 | 2 |
| 24 | 1996 | 44–16 | 73.3% | #4 | 2,074 | 1 | 28 | 2000 | 42–22 | 65.6% | #13 | 1,910 | 0 | 3 |
| 25 | 1997 | 37–19 | 66.1% | #12 | 2,011 | 1 | 28 | 2001 | 16–16 | 50.0% | #52 | 1,806 | 0 | 3 |
| 26 | 1998 | 38–16 | 70.4% | #8 | 1,968 | 1 | 30 | 2002 | 29–11 | 72.5% | #13 | 1,958 | 0 | 5 |
| 27 | 1999 | 38–22 | 63.3% | #15 | 1,898 | 1 | 31 | 2003 | 43–20 | 68.3% | #9 | 1,917 | 0 | 7 |
| 28 | 2000 | 48–19 | 71.6% | #5 | 1,951 | 1 | 32 | 2004 | 16–10 | 61.5% | #52 | 1,860 | 0 | 7 |
| 29 | 2001 | 19–13 | 59.4% | #35 | 1,852 | 1 | 32 | 2005 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #545 | 1,823 | 0 | 7 |
| 30 | 2002 | 26–24 | 52.0% | #34 | 1,756 | 1 | 32 | 2006 | 1–7 | 12.5% | #486 | 1,719 | 0 | 7 |
| 31 | 2003 | 29–21 | 58.0% | #18 | 1,756 | 1 | 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 2004 | 20–16 | 55.6% | #42 | 1,772 | 1 | 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 2005 | 29–19 | 60.4% | #31 | 1,812 | 1 | 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |