H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Elena Bovina vs Meghann Shaughnessy H2H: 1-2
Meghann Shaughnessy holds a 2–1 lead over Elena Bovina in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Meghann Shaughnessy leads 2–0 on hard courts, while Elena Bovina leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Elena Bovina won the 2005 Berlin fourth 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
–
2
3 main draw meetings
USA
Age 47
Right-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 6, 2005* | Berlin | WTA 1000 | R16 | Clay | Elena Bovina | 6-4 6-2 | Meghann Shaughnessy | Match data |
| Jan 22, 2003* | Australian Open | Grand Slam | R16 | Hard | Meghann Shaughnessy | 5-7 6-2 6-4 | Elena Bovina | Match data |
| Mar 1, 2001* | Scottsdale | WTA 500 | R32 | Hard | Meghann Shaughnessy | 4-6 6-2 6-3 | Elena Bovina | 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 |
| Meghann Shaughnessy | #1,104 | #11 | 1,949 | 1,888 | 233 | 233 | 50.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 6 |
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 | Meghann Shaughnessy | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 2000 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #133 | 1,500 | 0 | 0 | 1996 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #165 | 1,512 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2001 | 16–19 | 45.7% | #49 | 1,576 | 0 | 0 | 1997 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #198 | 1,499 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2002 | 29–19 | 60.4% | #26 | 1,803 | 0 | 2 | 1998 | 8–9 | 47.1% | #69 | 1,544 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2003 | 25–22 | 53.2% | #21 | 1,831 | 0 | 2 | 1999 | 10–22 | 31.2% | #99 | 1,439 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2004 | 37–18 | 67.3% | #15 | 1,951 | 0 | 3 | 2000 | 23–20 | 53.5% | #38 | 1,652 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 2005 | 12–8 | 60.0% | #61 | 1,908 | 0 | 3 | 2001 | 45–25 | 64.3% | #12 | 1,825 | 0 | 2 |
| 23 | 2006 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #1431 | 1,862 | 0 | 3 | 2002 | 29–27 | 51.8% | #30 | 1,716 | 0 | 2 |
| 24 | 2007 | 1–6 | 14.3% | #329 | 1,757 | 0 | 3 | 2003 | 32–23 | 58.2% | #17 | 1,725 | 0 | 3 |
| 25 | 2008 | 2–1 | 66.7% | #186 | 1,756 | 0 | 3 | 2004 | 20–22 | 47.6% | #40 | 1,663 | 0 | 3 |
| 26 | 2009 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #210 | 1,728 | 0 | 3 | 2005 | 17–25 | 40.5% | #66 | 1,563 | 0 | 3 |
| 27 | 2010 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #162 | 1,653 | 0 | 3 | 2006 | 27–20 | 57.4% | #37 | 1,709 | 0 | 5 |
| 28 | 2011 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #301 | 1,599 | 0 | 3 | 2007 | 18–22 | 45.0% | #52 | 1,666 | 0 | 6 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2008 | 0–5 | 0.0% | #836 | 1,579 | 0 | 6 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2009 | 1–8 | 11.1% | #590 | 1,533 | 0 | 6 |