H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Elena Likhovtseva vs María Sánchez Lorenzo H2H: 2-0
Elena Likhovtseva holds a 2–0 lead over María Sánchez Lorenzo in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Elena Likhovtseva leads 1–0 on clay and 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Elena Likhovtseva won the 2000 Miami second round 6-4 6-1.
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
2
–
0
2 main draw meetings
ESP
Age 48
Right-Handed
171 cm / 5'7"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 22, 2000* | Miami | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard | Elena Likhovtseva | 6-4 6-1 | María Sánchez Lorenzo | Match data |
| May 30, 1996* | Roland Garros | Grand Slam | R64 | Clay | Elena Likhovtseva | 6-3 3-6 9-7 | María Sánchez Lorenzo | 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 |
| María Sánchez Lorenzo | #1,067 | #33 | 939 | 1,727 | 127 | 180 | 41.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
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 | María Sánchez Lorenzo | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1994 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #131 | 1,521 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 1993 | 11–8 | 57.9% | #67 | 1,633 | 0 | 1 | 1995 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #125 | 1,554 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 1994 | 17–19 | 47.2% | #62 | 1,736 | 0 | 1 | 1996 | 4–11 | 26.7% | #117 | 1,500 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1995 | 18–18 | 50.0% | #45 | 1,718 | 0 | 1 | 1997 | 10–10 | 50.0% | #53 | 1,636 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1996 | 30–21 | 58.8% | #18 | 1,819 | 0 | 1 | 1998 | 10–21 | 32.3% | #72 | 1,599 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1997 | 24–24 | 50.0% | #31 | 1,749 | 0 | 2 | 1999 | 19–21 | 47.5% | #41 | 1,670 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 1998 | 35–29 | 54.7% | #26 | 1,829 | 0 | 2 | 2000 | 9–15 | 37.5% | #97 | 1,606 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 1999 | 34–29 | 54.0% | #18 | 1,755 | 0 | 2 | 2001 | 4–9 | 30.8% | #214 | 1,566 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 2000 | 29–27 | 51.8% | #21 | 1,770 | 0 | 2 | 2002 | 2–5 | 28.6% | #111 | 1,519 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 2001 | 25–24 | 51.0% | #36 | 1,746 | 0 | 2 | 2003 | 22–18 | 55.0% | #42 | 1,655 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2002 | 24–27 | 47.1% | #42 | 1,666 | 0 | 2 | 2004 | 22–25 | 46.8% | #51 | 1,654 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2003 | 26–26 | 50.0% | #37 | 1,678 | 0 | 2 | 2005 | 9–20 | 31.0% | #83 | 1,530 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2004 | 26–24 | 52.0% | #24 | 1,828 | 0 | 3 | 2006 | 9–15 | 37.5% | #141 | 1,520 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 2005 | 30–22 | 57.7% | #17 | 1,795 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 2006 | 16–20 | 44.4% | #43 | 1,695 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 2007 | 13–17 | 43.3% | #62 | 1,665 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 2008 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #1044 | 1,634 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |