H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Elena Likhovtseva vs Judith Wiesner H2H: 1-2
Judith Wiesner holds a 2–1 lead over Elena Likhovtseva in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Judith Wiesner leads 2–0 on hard courts, while Elena Likhovtseva leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Elena Likhovtseva won the 1996 Roland Garros first round 6-3 1-6 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 50
Right-Handed
174 cm / 5'9"
H2H
1
–
2
3 main draw meetings
AUT
Age 60
Right-Handed
172 cm / 5'8"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 29, 1996* | Roland Garros | Grand Slam | R128 | Clay | Elena Likhovtseva | 6-3 1-6 6-4 | Judith Wiesner | Match data |
| Mar 11, 1996* | Indian Wells | WTA 1000 | R32 | Hard | Judith Wiesner | 6-4 6-2 | Elena Likhovtseva | Match data |
| Aug 16, 1995* | Canadian Open | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard | Judith Wiesner | 6-7 6-4 6-2 | Elena Likhovtseva | 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 Likhovtseva | #1,092 | #15 | 1,807 | 1,912 | 358 | 338 | 51.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
| Judith Wiesner | #48 | #12 | 1,590 | 1,979 | 302 | 177 | 63.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 5 |
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 Likhovtseva | Judith Wiesner | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 1993 | 11–8 | 57.9% | #67 | 1,633 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 1994 | 17–19 | 47.2% | #62 | 1,736 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 1995 | 18–18 | 50.0% | #45 | 1,718 | 0 | 1 | 1985 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,491 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1996 | 30–21 | 58.8% | #18 | 1,819 | 0 | 1 | 1986 | 3–3 | 50.0% | #141 | 1,514 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1997 | 24–24 | 50.0% | #31 | 1,749 | 0 | 2 | 1987 | 19–13 | 59.4% | #33 | 1,696 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1998 | 35–29 | 54.7% | #26 | 1,829 | 0 | 2 | 1988 | 22–17 | 56.4% | #33 | 1,751 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 1999 | 34–29 | 54.0% | #18 | 1,755 | 0 | 2 | 1989 | 22–14 | 61.1% | #35 | 1,736 | 0 | 2 |
| 24 | 2000 | 29–27 | 51.8% | #21 | 1,770 | 0 | 2 | 1990 | 41–19 | 68.3% | #17 | 1,845 | 0 | 2 |
| 25 | 2001 | 25–24 | 51.0% | #36 | 1,746 | 0 | 2 | 1991 | 28–14 | 66.7% | #16 | 1,962 | 0 | 2 |
| 26 | 2002 | 24–27 | 47.1% | #42 | 1,666 | 0 | 2 | 1992 | 29–17 | 63.0% | #25 | 1,916 | 0 | 3 |
| 27 | 2003 | 26–26 | 50.0% | #37 | 1,678 | 0 | 2 | 1993 | 30–17 | 63.8% | #21 | 1,906 | 0 | 3 |
| 28 | 2004 | 26–24 | 52.0% | #24 | 1,828 | 0 | 3 | 1994 | 28–15 | 65.1% | #25 | 1,893 | 0 | 4 |
| 29 | 2005 | 30–22 | 57.7% | #17 | 1,795 | 0 | 3 | 1995 | 28–14 | 66.7% | #25 | 1,914 | 0 | 5 |
| 30 | 2006 | 16–20 | 44.4% | #43 | 1,695 | 0 | 3 | 1996 | 35–22 | 61.4% | #15 | 1,925 | 0 | 5 |
| 31 | 2007 | 13–17 | 43.3% | #62 | 1,665 | 0 | 3 | 1997 | 17–11 | 60.7% | #48 | 1,829 | 0 | 5 |
| 32 | 2008 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #1044 | 1,634 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |