H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Elena Vesnina vs Shelby Rogers H2H: 1-2
Shelby Rogers holds a 2–1 lead over Elena Vesnina in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on hard courts, while Shelby Rogers leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Elena Vesnina won the 2017 Indian Wells second round 6-4 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 39
Right-Handed
176 cm / 5'9"
H2H
1
–
2
3 main draw meetings
USA
Age 33
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 11, 2017* | Indian Wells | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard | Elena Vesnina | 6-4 7-5 | Shelby Rogers | Match data |
| Oct 13, 2016* | Tianjin | WTA 250 | R32 | Hard | Shelby Rogers | 7-5 4-6 7-6(4) | Elena Vesnina | Match data |
| May 26, 2016* | Roland Garros | Grand Slam | R64 | Clay | Shelby Rogers | 6-4 6-2 | 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 |
| Shelby Rogers | #437 | #30 | 1,698 | 1,875 | 126 | 138 | 47.7% | 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 | Shelby Rogers | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 2004 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #259 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #352 | 1,494 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2005 | 6–6 | 50.0% | #106 | 1,511 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #426 | 1,479 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2006 | 20–24 | 45.5% | #47 | 1,617 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 2007 | 17–21 | 44.7% | #54 | 1,631 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #126 | 1,478 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2008 | 12–19 | 38.7% | #79 | 1,558 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 12–9 | 57.1% | #72 | 1,631 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2009 | 31–20 | 60.8% | #23 | 1,767 | 0 | 0 | 2015 | 4–14 | 22.2% | #151 | 1,528 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2010 | 22–22 | 50.0% | #52 | 1,720 | 0 | 0 | 2016 | 13–13 | 50.0% | #59 | 1,603 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2011 | 19–21 | 47.5% | #57 | 1,689 | 0 | 0 | 2017 | 23–19 | 54.8% | #59 | 1,691 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2012 | 14–17 | 45.2% | #68 | 1,701 | 0 | 0 | 2018 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #630 | 1,652 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2013 | 30–19 | 61.2% | #25 | 1,801 | 0 | 2 | 2019 | 3–9 | 25.0% | #177 | 1,577 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2014 | 16–17 | 48.5% | #64 | 1,689 | 0 | 2 | 2020 | 8–6 | 57.1% | #60 | 1,680 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2015 | 11–17 | 39.3% | #115 | 1,609 | 0 | 2 | 2021 | 28–21 | 57.1% | #40 | 1,802 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2016 | 28–16 | 63.6% | #16 | 1,778 | 0 | 2 | 2022 | 20–19 | 51.3% | #47 | 1,820 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2017 | 25–26 | 49.0% | #18 | 1,691 | 0 | 3 | 2023 | 9–13 | 40.9% | #149 | 1,778 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | 2018 | 8–11 | 42.1% | #137 | 1,679 | 0 | 3 | 2024 | 4–8 | 33.3% | #341 | 1,678 | 0 | 0 |
| 34 | 2021 | 3–3 | 50.0% | #310 | 1,689 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |