H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Flavia Pennetta vs Amélie Mauresmo H2H: 1-2
Amélie Mauresmo holds a 2–1 lead over Flavia Pennetta in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on hard courts, while Amélie Mauresmo leads 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Amélie Mauresmo won the 2009 Wimbledon third round 7-5 6-3.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
ITA
Age 44
Right-Handed
172 cm / 5'8"
H2H
1
–
2
3 main draw meetings
FRA
Age 47
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 28, 2009* | Wimbledon | Grand Slam | R32 | Grass | Amélie Mauresmo | 7-5 6-3 | Flavia Pennetta | Match data |
| Mar 26, 2009* | Miami | WTA 1000 | R32 | Hard | Amélie Mauresmo | 6-7(5) 6-2 6-2 | Flavia Pennetta | Match data |
| Sep 2, 2008* | US Open | Grand Slam | R16 | Hard | Flavia Pennetta | 6-3 6-0 | Amélie Mauresmo | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Flavia Pennetta | #15 | #6 | 3,621 | 1,982 | 418 | 272 | 60.6% | 1 | 1 | 0 | 6 | 3 | 11 |
| Amélie Mauresmo | #21 | #1 | 4,992 | 2,217 | 458 | 183 | 71.5% | 2 | 6 | 1 | 15 | 1 | 25 |
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 | Flavia Pennetta | Amélie Mauresmo | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1995 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #250 | 1,488 | 0 | 0 |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1996 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #180 | 1,522 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1997 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #100 | 1,555 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1998 | 20–18 | 52.6% | #29 | 1,729 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1999 | 32–14 | 69.6% | #10 | 1,914 | 0 | 1 |
| 20 | 2002 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #95 | 1,482 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 26–12 | 68.4% | #16 | 1,932 | 0 | 2 |
| 21 | 2003 | 18–20 | 47.4% | #69 | 1,559 | 0 | 0 | 2001 | 43–12 | 78.2% | #9 | 2,029 | 0 | 6 |
| 22 | 2004 | 30–22 | 57.7% | #38 | 1,670 | 0 | 1 | 2002 | 45–15 | 75.0% | #6 | 2,060 | 0 | 8 |
| 23 | 2005 | 37–21 | 63.8% | #23 | 1,777 | 0 | 3 | 2003 | 45–17 | 72.6% | #4 | 2,061 | 0 | 10 |
| 24 | 2006 | 29–18 | 61.7% | #28 | 1,729 | 0 | 3 | 2004 | 56–11 | 83.6% | #2 | 2,175 | 0 | 15 |
| 25 | 2007 | 30–24 | 55.6% | #39 | 1,768 | 0 | 4 | 2005 | 53–16 | 76.8% | #3 | 2,127 | 0 | 19 |
| 26 | 2008 | 50–23 | 68.5% | #13 | 1,900 | 0 | 6 | 2006 | 50–14 | 78.1% | #3 | 2,135 | 2 | 23 |
| 27 | 2009 | 52–23 | 69.3% | #12 | 1,902 | 0 | 8 | 2007 | 27–14 | 65.9% | #18 | 1,960 | 2 | 24 |
| 28 | 2010 | 45–23 | 66.2% | #24 | 1,847 | 0 | 9 | 2008 | 30–19 | 61.2% | #24 | 1,815 | 2 | 24 |
| 29 | 2011 | 31–22 | 58.5% | #20 | 1,785 | 0 | 9 | 2009 | 25–12 | 67.6% | #21 | 1,871 | 2 | 25 |
| 30 | 2012 | 19–13 | 59.4% | #45 | 1,735 | 0 | 9 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 2013 | 19–20 | 48.7% | #31 | 1,745 | 0 | 9 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 2014 | 30–20 | 60.0% | #12 | 1,780 | 0 | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 2015 | 27–20 | 57.4% | #8 | 1,823 | 1 | 11 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |