H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Elena Bovina vs Rita Grande H2H: 2-2
Elena Bovina and Rita Grande are tied 2–2 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 4 main-draw meetings, Rita Grande leads 2–0 on clay, while Elena Bovina leads 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Rita Grande won the 2003 Roland Garros second round 7-5 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 43
Right-Handed
189 cm / 6'2"
H2H
2
–
2
4 main draw meetings
ITA
Age 51
Right-Handed
177 cm / 5'10"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 29, 2003* | Roland Garros | Grand Slam | R64 | Clay | Rita Grande | 7-5 6-3 | Elena Bovina | Match data |
| Jan 17, 2003* | Australian Open | Grand Slam | R64 | Hard | Elena Bovina | 6-1 6-2 | Rita Grande | Match data |
| Jun 13, 2002* | Birmingham | WTA 250 | R32 | Grass | Elena Bovina | 4-6 6-4 6-0 | Rita Grande | Match data |
| Jul 20, 2000* | Sopot | WTA 500 | R32 | Clay | Rita Grande | 6-3 7-6(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 |
| Rita Grande | #1,172 | #24 | 1,020 | 1,755 | 172 | 218 | 44.1% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
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 | Rita Grande | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1991 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #370 | 1,471 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 2000 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #133 | 1,500 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 2001 | 16–19 | 45.7% | #49 | 1,576 | 0 | 0 | 1993 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #186 | 1,456 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2002 | 29–19 | 60.4% | #26 | 1,803 | 0 | 2 | 1994 | 7–12 | 36.8% | #146 | 1,491 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2003 | 25–22 | 53.2% | #21 | 1,831 | 0 | 2 | 1995 | 10–11 | 47.6% | #72 | 1,591 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2004 | 37–18 | 67.3% | #15 | 1,951 | 0 | 3 | 1996 | 10–15 | 40.0% | #71 | 1,627 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2005 | 12–8 | 60.0% | #61 | 1,908 | 0 | 3 | 1997 | 15–18 | 45.5% | #44 | 1,676 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2006 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #1431 | 1,862 | 0 | 3 | 1998 | 12–23 | 34.3% | #59 | 1,584 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2007 | 1–6 | 14.3% | #329 | 1,757 | 0 | 3 | 1999 | 21–18 | 53.8% | #54 | 1,679 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2008 | 2–1 | 66.7% | #186 | 1,756 | 0 | 3 | 2000 | 15–21 | 41.7% | #77 | 1,602 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2009 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #210 | 1,728 | 0 | 3 | 2001 | 35–26 | 57.4% | #24 | 1,742 | 0 | 2 |
| 27 | 2010 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #162 | 1,653 | 0 | 3 | 2002 | 21–27 | 43.8% | #46 | 1,641 | 0 | 2 |
| 28 | 2011 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #301 | 1,599 | 0 | 3 | 2003 | 14–25 | 35.9% | #70 | 1,534 | 0 | 3 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2004 | 12–18 | 40.0% | #104 | 1,536 | 0 | 3 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2005 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #1088 | 1,518 | 0 | 3 |