H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Elena Dementieva vs Anke Huber H2H: 3-1
Elena Dementieva holds a 3–1 lead over Anke Huber in their WTA head-to-head. Across 4 main-draw meetings, Elena Dementieva leads 3–0 on hard courts, while Anke Huber leads 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Elena Dementieva won the 2001 US Open third round 6-3 7-5.
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
3
–
1
4 main draw meetings
GER
Age 51
Right-Handed
173 cm / 5'8"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 2, 2001* | US Open | Grand Slam | R32 | Hard | Elena Dementieva | 6-3 7-5 | Anke Huber | Match data |
| Jul 1, 2001* | Wimbledon | Grand Slam | R32 | Grass | Anke Huber | 6-0 6-2 | Elena Dementieva | Match data |
| Aug 22, 2000 | US Open | Grand Slam | QF | Hard | Elena Dementieva | 6-1 3-6 6-3 | Anke Huber | Match data |
| Mar 12, 2000* | Indian Wells | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard | Elena Dementieva | 6-4 4-6 6-4 | Anke Huber | 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 Dementieva | #10 | #3 | 8,286 | 2,108 | 472 | 243 | 66.0% | 0 | 3 | 0 | 9 | 3 | 15 |
| Anke Huber | #18 | #4 | 2,721 | 2,130 | 393 | 203 | 65.9% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 10 | 12 |
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 | Anke Huber | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 14 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1989 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #199 | 1,517 | 0 | 0 |
| 15 | 1997 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #349 | 1,492 | 0 | 0 | 1990 | 14–9 | 60.9% | #37 | 1,708 | 0 | 1 |
| 16 | 1998 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #186 | 1,478 | 0 | 0 | 1991 | 30–13 | 69.8% | #14 | 1,959 | 0 | 2 |
| 17 | 1999 | 11–11 | 50.0% | #62 | 1,584 | 0 | 0 | 1992 | 28–15 | 65.1% | #11 | 1,964 | 0 | 2 |
| 18 | 2000 | 33–19 | 63.5% | #11 | 1,859 | 0 | 0 | 1993 | 41–15 | 73.2% | #10 | 2,056 | 0 | 3 |
| 19 | 2001 | 34–22 | 60.7% | #15 | 1,833 | 0 | 0 | 1994 | 38–16 | 70.4% | #12 | 2,027 | 0 | 6 |
| 20 | 2002 | 36–26 | 58.1% | #19 | 1,763 | 0 | 0 | 1995 | 41–15 | 73.2% | #10 | 2,091 | 0 | 7 |
| 21 | 2003 | 47–25 | 65.3% | #8 | 1,966 | 0 | 3 | 1996 | 45–15 | 75.0% | #7 | 2,055 | 0 | 10 |
| 22 | 2004 | 40–22 | 64.5% | #6 | 1,986 | 0 | 4 | 1997 | 34–24 | 58.6% | #13 | 1,954 | 0 | 10 |
| 23 | 2005 | 41–22 | 65.1% | #8 | 1,925 | 0 | 4 | 1998 | 25–18 | 58.1% | #21 | 1,898 | 0 | 10 |
| 24 | 2006 | 45–21 | 68.2% | #8 | 1,908 | 0 | 6 | 1999 | 32–26 | 55.2% | #16 | 1,886 | 0 | 10 |
| 25 | 2007 | 41–18 | 69.5% | #11 | 1,964 | 0 | 8 | 2000 | 29–16 | 64.4% | #19 | 1,898 | 0 | 12 |
| 26 | 2008 | 50–17 | 74.6% | #4 | 2,014 | 0 | 10 | 2001 | 35–20 | 63.6% | #18 | 1,834 | 0 | 12 |
| 27 | 2009 | 55–18 | 75.3% | #5 | 1,981 | 0 | 13 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 2010 | 39–19 | 67.2% | #9 | 1,928 | 0 | 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |