H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Dominika Cibulkova vs Shahar Peer H2H: 1-1
Dominika Cibulkova and Shahar Peer are tied 1–1 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Dominika Cibulkova leads 1–0 on grass, while Shahar Peer leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Dominika Cibulkova won the 2012 's Hertogenbosch fourth round 6-2 7-6(5).
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
SVK
Age 37
Right-Handed
161 cm / 5'3"
H2H
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
ISR
Age 39
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 22, 2012* | 's Hertogenbosch | WTA 250 | R16 | Grass | Dominika Cibulkova | 6-2 7-6(5) | Shahar Peer | Match data |
| Aug 8, 2007* | Los Angeles | WTA 500 | R64 | Hard | Shahar Peer | 6-2 6-3 | Dominika Cibulkova | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dominika Cibulkova | #315 | #4 | 5,245 | 1,966 | 365 | 261 | 58.3% | 0 | 0 | 1 | 5 | 2 | 8 |
| Shahar Peer | #1,185 | #11 | 3,410 | 1,966 | 268 | 204 | 56.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 5 |
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 | Dominika Cibulkova | Shahar Peer | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 2006 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #153 | 1,506 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 3–3 | 50.0% | #176 | 1,509 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2007 | 17–17 | 50.0% | #51 | 1,605 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 22–20 | 52.4% | #45 | 1,636 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2008 | 34–25 | 57.6% | #19 | 1,840 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 38–20 | 65.5% | #20 | 1,826 | 0 | 3 |
| 20 | 2009 | 20–17 | 54.1% | #28 | 1,733 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 39–21 | 65.0% | #17 | 1,830 | 0 | 3 |
| 21 | 2010 | 30–24 | 55.6% | #31 | 1,753 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 24–20 | 54.5% | #38 | 1,707 | 0 | 3 |
| 22 | 2011 | 41–21 | 66.1% | #18 | 1,893 | 0 | 1 | 2009 | 36–21 | 63.2% | #30 | 1,787 | 0 | 5 |
| 23 | 2012 | 34–25 | 57.6% | #15 | 1,810 | 0 | 2 | 2010 | 47–21 | 69.1% | #13 | 1,885 | 0 | 5 |
| 24 | 2013 | 27–23 | 54.0% | #23 | 1,738 | 0 | 3 | 2011 | 23–21 | 52.3% | #37 | 1,706 | 0 | 5 |
| 25 | 2014 | 33–22 | 60.0% | #10 | 1,721 | 0 | 4 | 2012 | 15–22 | 40.5% | #74 | 1,584 | 0 | 5 |
| 26 | 2015 | 19–16 | 54.3% | #38 | 1,757 | 0 | 4 | 2013 | 10–14 | 41.7% | #77 | 1,558 | 0 | 5 |
| 27 | 2016 | 53–21 | 71.6% | #5 | 1,951 | 0 | 8 | 2014 | 10–18 | 35.7% | #117 | 1,539 | 0 | 5 |
| 28 | 2017 | 26–22 | 54.2% | #26 | 1,778 | 0 | 8 | 2015 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #177 | 1,526 | 0 | 5 |
| 29 | 2018 | 27–18 | 60.0% | #25 | 1,865 | 0 | 8 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 2019 | 2–8 | 20.0% | #315 | 1,764 | 0 | 8 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |