H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Elena Dementieva vs Virginie Razzano H2H: 1-2
Virginie Razzano holds a 2–1 lead over Elena Dementieva in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Virginie Razzano leads 1–0 on clay and 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Virginie Razzano won the 2009 Eastbourne fourth round 6-0 3-6 7-6(4).
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
1
–
2
3 main draw meetings
FRA
Age 43
Right-Handed
174 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 19, 2009* | Eastbourne | WTA 500 | R16 | Grass | Virginie Razzano | 6-0 3-6 7-6(4) | Elena Dementieva | Match data |
| Aug 10, 2001* | Los Angeles | WTA 500 | R16 | Hard | Elena Dementieva | 6-4 6-4 | Virginie Razzano | Match data |
| Jun 1, 2000* | Roland Garros | Grand Slam | R64 | Clay | Virginie Razzano | (w/o) | Elena Dementieva | 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 |
| Virginie Razzano | #1,226 | #16 | 2,420 | 1,876 | 200 | 216 | 48.1% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
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 | Virginie Razzano | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 16 | 1998 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #186 | 1,478 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #344 | 1,483 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 1999 | 11–11 | 50.0% | #62 | 1,584 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #143 | 1,507 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2000 | 33–19 | 63.5% | #11 | 1,859 | 0 | 0 | 2001 | 10–12 | 45.5% | #87 | 1,589 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2001 | 34–22 | 60.7% | #15 | 1,833 | 0 | 0 | 2002 | 11–12 | 47.8% | #76 | 1,662 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2002 | 36–26 | 58.1% | #19 | 1,763 | 0 | 0 | 2003 | 15–20 | 42.9% | #72 | 1,613 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2003 | 47–25 | 65.3% | #8 | 1,966 | 0 | 3 | 2004 | 7–8 | 46.7% | #60 | 1,604 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2004 | 40–22 | 64.5% | #6 | 1,986 | 0 | 4 | 2005 | 16–22 | 42.1% | #51 | 1,608 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2005 | 41–22 | 65.1% | #8 | 1,925 | 0 | 4 | 2006 | 10–18 | 35.7% | #88 | 1,595 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2006 | 45–21 | 68.2% | #8 | 1,908 | 0 | 6 | 2007 | 34–20 | 63.0% | #28 | 1,805 | 0 | 2 |
| 25 | 2007 | 41–18 | 69.5% | #11 | 1,964 | 0 | 8 | 2008 | 14–20 | 41.2% | #58 | 1,633 | 0 | 2 |
| 26 | 2008 | 50–17 | 74.6% | #4 | 2,014 | 0 | 10 | 2009 | 31–20 | 60.8% | #19 | 1,801 | 0 | 2 |
| 27 | 2009 | 55–18 | 75.3% | #5 | 1,981 | 0 | 13 | 2010 | 9–15 | 37.5% | #113 | 1,660 | 0 | 2 |
| 28 | 2010 | 39–19 | 67.2% | #9 | 1,928 | 0 | 15 | 2011 | 13–13 | 50.0% | #83 | 1,681 | 0 | 2 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2012 | 5–9 | 35.7% | #160 | 1,633 | 0 | 2 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2013 | 9–8 | 52.9% | #99 | 1,683 | 0 | 2 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2014 | 4–8 | 33.3% | #165 | 1,621 | 0 | 2 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2015 | 4–2 | 66.7% | #200 | 1,657 | 0 | 2 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2016 | 5–4 | 55.6% | #169 | 1,647 | 0 | 2 |