H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 08:25 UTC
Elena Bovina vs Jelena Kostanic Tosic H2H: 1-0
Elena Bovina holds a 1–0 lead over Jelena Kostanic Tosic in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Elena Bovina leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Elena Bovina won the 2004 Linz third round 6-4 6-2.
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 43
Right-Handed
189 cm / 6'2"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
CRO
Age 45
Left-Handed
168 cm / 5'6"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 28, 2004* | Linz | WTA 500 | R32 | Hard | Elena Bovina | 6-4 6-2 | Jelena Kostanic Tosic | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Elena Bovina | #777 | #14 | 1,758 | 1,960 | 127 | 110 | 53.6% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
| Jelena Kostanic Tosic | #937 | #32 | 900 | 1,726 | 112 | 151 | 42.6% | 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 | Elena Bovina | Jelena Kostanic Tosic | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1998 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #240 | 1,490 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 2000 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #133 | 1,500 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 4–5 | 44.4% | #97 | 1,512 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2001 | 16–19 | 45.7% | #49 | 1,576 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 10–13 | 43.5% | #114 | 1,523 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2002 | 29–19 | 60.4% | #26 | 1,803 | 0 | 2 | 2001 | 4–4 | 50.0% | #131 | 1,559 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2003 | 25–22 | 53.2% | #21 | 1,831 | 0 | 2 | 2002 | 14–17 | 45.2% | #70 | 1,570 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2004 | 37–18 | 67.3% | #15 | 1,951 | 0 | 3 | 2003 | 16–20 | 44.4% | #66 | 1,621 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2005 | 12–8 | 60.0% | #61 | 1,908 | 0 | 3 | 2004 | 22–25 | 46.8% | #35 | 1,678 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2006 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #1431 | 1,862 | 0 | 3 | 2005 | 11–21 | 34.4% | #87 | 1,549 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2007 | 1–6 | 14.3% | #329 | 1,757 | 0 | 3 | 2006 | 19–18 | 51.4% | #51 | 1,577 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2008 | 2–1 | 66.7% | #186 | 1,756 | 0 | 3 | 2007 | 10–17 | 37.0% | #103 | 1,534 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2009 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #210 | 1,728 | 0 | 3 | 2008 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #114 | 1,499 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2010 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #162 | 1,653 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 2011 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #301 | 1,599 | 0 | 3 | 2010 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #830 | 1,460 | 0 | 0 |