H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 08:25 UTC
Cynthia Doerner vs Kristien Shaw H2H: 2-3
Kristien Shaw holds a 3–2 lead over Cynthia Doerner in their WTA head-to-head. Across 5 main-draw meetings, Cynthia Doerner leads 2–1 on hard courts, while Kristien Shaw leads 1–0 on carpet. Most recently, Kristien Shaw won the 1977 Sao Paulo third round 7-5 2-6 1-0 RET.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 20, 1977* | Sao Paulo | WTA 250 | R32 | Hard | Kristien Shaw | 7-5 2-6 1-0 (ret.) | Cynthia Doerner | Match data |
| Oct 13, 1977* | Phoenix | WTA 250 | R32 | Hard | Cynthia Doerner | 6-2 6-2 | Kristien Shaw | Match data |
| Mar 10, 1977* | Dallas | WTA 250 | R32 | Carpet | Kristien Shaw | 6-2 6-1 | Cynthia Doerner | Match data |
| Jun 21, 1973* | London Rothmans | WTA 250 | R32 | Grass | Kristien Shaw | 6-1 6-3 | Cynthia Doerner | Match data |
| Apr 20, 1972* | Tucson | WTA 250 | R32 | Hard | Cynthia Doerner | 6-2 6-2 | Kristien Shaw | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cynthia Doerner | — | — | — | 1,893 | 152 | 162 | 48.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 5 |
| Kristien Shaw | — | — | — | 1,929 | 119 | 141 | 45.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
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 | Cynthia Doerner | Kristien Shaw | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1968 | 0–2 | 0.0% | — | 1,484 | 0 | 0 |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1969 | 5–8 | 38.5% | — | 1,504 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 1968 | 1–3 | 25.0% | — | 1,471 | 0 | 0 | 1970 | 12–10 | 54.5% | — | 1,582 | 0 | 1 |
| 18 | 1969 | 0–5 | 0.0% | — | 1,428 | 0 | 0 | 1971 | 23–25 | 47.9% | — | 1,709 | 0 | 1 |
| 19 | 1970 | 2–3 | 40.0% | — | 1,456 | 0 | 0 | 1972 | 2–13 | 13.3% | — | 1,617 | 0 | 1 |
| 20 | 1971 | 3–8 | 27.3% | — | 1,415 | 0 | 0 | 1973 | 29–24 | 54.7% | — | 1,913 | 0 | 1 |
| 21 | 1972 | 21–20 | 51.2% | — | 1,624 | 0 | 1 | 1974 | 10–14 | 41.7% | — | 1,833 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 1973 | 7–13 | 35.0% | — | 1,609 | 0 | 1 | 1975 | 14–14 | 50.0% | — | 1,802 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 1974 | 4–5 | 44.4% | — | 1,625 | 0 | 1 | 1976 | 6–4 | 60.0% | — | 1,852 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 1975 | 44–23 | 65.7% | — | 1,852 | 0 | 4 | 1977 | 17–20 | 45.9% | — | 1,834 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 1976 | 18–26 | 40.9% | — | 1,713 | 0 | 4 | 1978 | 1–7 | 12.5% | — | 1,752 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 1977 | 15–19 | 44.1% | — | 1,742 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 27 | 1978 | 11–18 | 37.9% | — | 1,621 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 1979 | 14–12 | 53.8% | — | 1,649 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 1980 | 12–7 | 63.2% | — | 1,662 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |