H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Ekaterina Makarova vs Shelby Rogers H2H: 1-0
Ekaterina Makarova holds a 1–0 lead over Shelby Rogers in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Ekaterina Makarova leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Ekaterina Makarova won the 2014 Roland Garros first round 6-2 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.
RUS
Age 38
Left-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
USA
Age 33
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 28, 2014* | Roland Garros | Grand Slam | R128 | Clay | Ekaterina Makarova | 6-2 6-3 | Shelby Rogers | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ekaterina Makarova | #1,000 | #8 | 3,620 | 1,940 | 248 | 222 | 52.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 3 |
| Shelby Rogers | #437 | #30 | 1,698 | 1,875 | 126 | 138 | 47.7% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
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 | Ekaterina Makarova | Shelby Rogers | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2010 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #352 | 1,494 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2011 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #426 | 1,479 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2007 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #110 | 1,536 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 2008 | 17–20 | 45.9% | #46 | 1,626 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #126 | 1,478 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2009 | 19–22 | 46.3% | #60 | 1,634 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 12–9 | 57.1% | #72 | 1,631 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2010 | 14–20 | 41.2% | #49 | 1,662 | 0 | 1 | 2015 | 4–14 | 22.2% | #151 | 1,528 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2011 | 15–23 | 39.5% | #53 | 1,604 | 0 | 1 | 2016 | 13–13 | 50.0% | #59 | 1,603 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2012 | 26–19 | 57.8% | #20 | 1,757 | 0 | 1 | 2017 | 23–19 | 54.8% | #59 | 1,691 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2013 | 24–18 | 57.1% | #24 | 1,838 | 0 | 1 | 2018 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #630 | 1,652 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2014 | 39–21 | 65.0% | #11 | 1,837 | 0 | 2 | 2019 | 3–9 | 25.0% | #177 | 1,577 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2015 | 26–16 | 61.9% | #23 | 1,784 | 0 | 2 | 2020 | 8–6 | 57.1% | #60 | 1,680 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2016 | 23–18 | 56.1% | #30 | 1,782 | 0 | 2 | 2021 | 28–21 | 57.1% | #40 | 1,802 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2017 | 27–21 | 56.2% | #33 | 1,836 | 0 | 3 | 2022 | 20–19 | 51.3% | #47 | 1,820 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2018 | 16–19 | 45.7% | #57 | 1,750 | 0 | 3 | 2023 | 9–13 | 40.9% | #149 | 1,778 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | 2019 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #997 | 1,700 | 0 | 3 | 2024 | 4–8 | 33.3% | #341 | 1,678 | 0 | 0 |