H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Elena Vesnina vs Evgeniya Rodina H2H: 1-2
Evgeniya Rodina holds a 2–1 lead over Elena Vesnina in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Elena Vesnina leads 1–0 on clay, while Evgeniya Rodina leads 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Evgeniya Rodina won the 2009 Moscow third round 6-1 3-6 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 39
Right-Handed
176 cm / 5'9"
H2H
1
–
2
3 main draw meetings
RUS
Age 37
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 22, 2009* | Moscow | WTA 500 | R32 | Hard | Evgeniya Rodina | 6-1 3-6 6-2 | Elena Vesnina | Match data |
| Apr 15, 2009* | Charleston | WTA 500 | R64 | Clay | Elena Vesnina | 6-0 6-2 | Evgeniya Rodina | Match data |
| Jun 26, 2008* | Wimbledon | Grand Slam | R64 | Grass | Evgeniya Rodina | 6-1 7-6(0) | Elena Vesnina | 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 Vesnina | #573 | #13 | 3,320 | 1,858 | 262 | 260 | 50.2% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 3 |
| Evgeniya Rodina | #1,376 | #67 | 882 | 1,663 | 74 | 119 | 38.3% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
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 Vesnina | Evgeniya Rodina | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2005 | 2–1 | 66.7% | #320 | 1,516 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 2004 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #259 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 2005 | 6–6 | 50.0% | #106 | 1,511 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #120 | 1,524 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2006 | 20–24 | 45.5% | #47 | 1,617 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 5–9 | 35.7% | #145 | 1,523 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2007 | 17–21 | 44.7% | #54 | 1,631 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #99 | 1,527 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2008 | 12–19 | 38.7% | #79 | 1,558 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 5–4 | 55.6% | #107 | 1,579 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2009 | 31–20 | 60.8% | #23 | 1,767 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 9–12 | 42.9% | #106 | 1,560 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2010 | 22–22 | 50.0% | #52 | 1,720 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #370 | 1,546 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2011 | 19–21 | 47.5% | #57 | 1,689 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #474 | 1,529 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2012 | 14–17 | 45.2% | #68 | 1,701 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 26 | 2013 | 30–19 | 61.2% | #25 | 1,801 | 0 | 2 | 2015 | 14–17 | 45.2% | #87 | 1,588 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2014 | 16–17 | 48.5% | #64 | 1,689 | 0 | 2 | 2016 | 8–13 | 38.1% | #86 | 1,650 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2015 | 11–17 | 39.3% | #115 | 1,609 | 0 | 2 | 2017 | 9–18 | 33.3% | #105 | 1,572 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2016 | 28–16 | 63.6% | #16 | 1,778 | 0 | 2 | 2018 | 9–11 | 45.0% | #71 | 1,570 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2017 | 25–26 | 49.0% | #18 | 1,691 | 0 | 3 | 2019 | 4–16 | 20.0% | #295 | 1,467 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | 2018 | 8–11 | 42.1% | #137 | 1,679 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2022 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #438 | 1,512 | 0 | 0 |
| 34 | 2021 | 3–3 | 50.0% | #310 | 1,689 | 0 | 3 | 2023 | 3–8 | 27.3% | #443 | 1,504 | 0 | 0 |