H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Hana Mandlikova vs Ivanna Madruga H2H: 2-0
Hana Mandlikova holds a 2–0 lead over Ivanna Madruga in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Hana Mandlikova leads 2–0 on clay. Most recently, Hana Mandlikova won the 1980 Roland Garros quarterfinal 6-2 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.
AUS
Age 64
Right-Handed
173 cm / 5'8"
H2H
2
–
0
2 main draw meetings
Age 65
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 5, 1980* | Roland Garros | Grand Slam | QF | Clay | Hana Mandlikova | 6-2 6-3 | Ivanna Madruga | Match data |
| Apr 7, 1980 | Hilton Head | WTA 250 | BR | Clay | Hana Mandlikova | 6-4 | Ivanna Madruga | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hana Mandlikova | #31 | #3 | 157 | 2,299 | 516 | 191 | 73.0% | 4 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 18 | 25 |
| Ivanna Madruga | — | — | — | 1,916 | 131 | 88 | 59.8% | 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 | Hana Mandlikova | Ivanna Madruga | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 14 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1975 | 1–1 | 50.0% | — | 1,504 | 0 | 0 |
| 15 | 1977 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,492 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 16 | 1978 | 22–8 | 73.3% | — | 1,750 | 0 | 1 | 1977 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,489 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 1979 | 36–14 | 72.0% | — | 1,985 | 0 | 5 | 1978 | 6–6 | 50.0% | — | 1,556 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 1980 | 76–17 | 81.7% | — | 2,230 | 1 | 11 | 1979 | 7–10 | 41.2% | — | 1,628 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1981 | 56–24 | 70.0% | — | 2,108 | 2 | 14 | 1980 | 29–18 | 61.7% | — | 1,799 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1982 | 35–19 | 64.8% | — | 1,998 | 2 | 14 | 1981 | 17–14 | 54.8% | — | 1,753 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1983 | 44–21 | 67.7% | — | 1,977 | 2 | 14 | 1982 | 27–13 | 67.5% | — | 1,823 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 1984 | 47–11 | 81.0% | #3 | 2,081 | 2 | 19 | 1983 | 25–12 | 67.6% | — | 1,881 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 1985 | 53–13 | 80.3% | #3 | 2,210 | 3 | 22 | 1984 | 14–8 | 63.6% | — | 1,830 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 1986 | 44–15 | 74.6% | #4 | 2,233 | 3 | 22 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 25 | 1987 | 47–13 | 78.3% | #5 | 2,136 | 4 | 25 | 1986 | 5–5 | 50.0% | — | 1,776 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 1988 | 15–7 | 68.2% | #29 | 2,031 | 4 | 25 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 27 | 1989 | 33–19 | 63.5% | #14 | 1,941 | 4 | 25 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 1990 | 8–9 | 47.1% | #31 | 1,809 | 4 | 25 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |