H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Elena Dementieva vs Amélie Mauresmo H2H: 5-11
Amélie Mauresmo holds a 11–5 lead over Elena Dementieva in their WTA head-to-head. Across 16 main-draw meetings, they are tied 4–4 on hard courts, while Amélie Mauresmo leads 4–1 on clay. Most recently, Amélie Mauresmo won the 2009 Madrid fourth round 1-6 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 44
Right-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H
5
–
11
16 main draw meetings
FRA
Age 47
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
* 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 Dementieva | #10 | #3 | 8,286 | 2,108 | 472 | 243 | 66.0% | 0 | 3 | 0 | 9 | 3 | 15 |
| Amélie Mauresmo | #21 | #1 | 4,992 | 2,217 | 458 | 183 | 71.5% | 2 | 6 | 1 | 15 | 1 | 25 |
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 Dementieva | Amélie Mauresmo | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 15 | 1997 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #349 | 1,492 | 0 | 0 | 1995 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #250 | 1,488 | 0 | 0 |
| 16 | 1998 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #186 | 1,478 | 0 | 0 | 1996 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #180 | 1,522 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 1999 | 11–11 | 50.0% | #62 | 1,584 | 0 | 0 | 1997 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #100 | 1,555 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2000 | 33–19 | 63.5% | #11 | 1,859 | 0 | 0 | 1998 | 20–18 | 52.6% | #29 | 1,729 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2001 | 34–22 | 60.7% | #15 | 1,833 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 32–14 | 69.6% | #10 | 1,914 | 0 | 1 |
| 20 | 2002 | 36–26 | 58.1% | #19 | 1,763 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 26–12 | 68.4% | #16 | 1,932 | 0 | 2 |
| 21 | 2003 | 47–25 | 65.3% | #8 | 1,966 | 0 | 3 | 2001 | 43–12 | 78.2% | #9 | 2,029 | 0 | 6 |
| 22 | 2004 | 40–22 | 64.5% | #6 | 1,986 | 0 | 4 | 2002 | 45–15 | 75.0% | #6 | 2,060 | 0 | 8 |
| 23 | 2005 | 41–22 | 65.1% | #8 | 1,925 | 0 | 4 | 2003 | 45–17 | 72.6% | #4 | 2,061 | 0 | 10 |
| 24 | 2006 | 45–21 | 68.2% | #8 | 1,908 | 0 | 6 | 2004 | 56–11 | 83.6% | #2 | 2,175 | 0 | 15 |
| 25 | 2007 | 41–18 | 69.5% | #11 | 1,964 | 0 | 8 | 2005 | 53–16 | 76.8% | #3 | 2,127 | 0 | 19 |
| 26 | 2008 | 50–17 | 74.6% | #4 | 2,014 | 0 | 10 | 2006 | 50–14 | 78.1% | #3 | 2,135 | 2 | 23 |
| 27 | 2009 | 55–18 | 75.3% | #5 | 1,981 | 0 | 13 | 2007 | 27–14 | 65.9% | #18 | 1,960 | 2 | 24 |
| 28 | 2010 | 39–19 | 67.2% | #9 | 1,928 | 0 | 15 | 2008 | 30–19 | 61.2% | #24 | 1,815 | 2 | 24 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2009 | 25–12 | 67.6% | #21 | 1,871 | 2 | 25 |