H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 08:25 UTC
Jelena Dokic vs Tatiana Panova H2H: 4-1
Jelena Dokic holds a 4–1 lead over Tatiana Panova in their WTA head-to-head. Across 5 main-draw meetings, Jelena Dokic leads 3–0 on clay and 1–0 on carpet. Most recently, Jelena Dokic won the 2004 Charleston second round 6-0 5-7 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.
AUS
Age 43
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H
4
–
1
5 main draw meetings
RUS
Age 49
Right-Handed
154 cm / 5'1"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 14, 2004* | Charleston | WTA 1000 | R64 | Clay | Jelena Dokic | 6-0 5-7 7-5 | Tatiana Panova | Match data |
| Feb 8, 2004* | Tokyo | WTA 1000 | QF | Carpet | Jelena Dokic | 6-1 6-1 | Tatiana Panova | Match data |
| Oct 11, 2002* | Filderstadt | WTA 500 | R16 | Hard | Tatiana Panova | 1-6 6-4 6-1 | Jelena Dokic | Match data |
| Apr 7, 2002* | Sarasota | WTA 250 | F | Clay | Jelena Dokic | 6-2 6-2 | Tatiana Panova | Match data |
| May 18, 2000* | Rome | WTA 1000 | R32 | Clay | Jelena Dokic | 6-3 6-1 | Tatiana Panova | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jelena Dokic | #945 | #4 | 3,338 | 2,031 | 208 | 175 | 54.3% | 0 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 6 |
| Tatiana Panova | #1,113 | #20 | 1,270 | 1,782 | 130 | 196 | 39.9% | 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 | Jelena Dokic | Tatiana Panova | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 15 | 1998 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #349 | 1,497 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 16 | 1999 | 11–10 | 52.4% | #43 | 1,629 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 2000 | 28–19 | 59.6% | #24 | 1,769 | 0 | 0 | 1994 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #142 | 1,508 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2001 | 53–23 | 69.7% | #8 | 1,999 | 0 | 3 | 1995 | 1–6 | 14.3% | #179 | 1,486 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2002 | 53–27 | 66.2% | #9 | 1,897 | 0 | 5 | 1996 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #159 | 1,498 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2003 | 28–30 | 48.3% | #15 | 1,778 | 0 | 5 | 1997 | 3–10 | 23.1% | #97 | 1,475 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2004 | 7–16 | 30.4% | #124 | 1,582 | 0 | 5 | 1998 | 7–18 | 28.0% | #78 | 1,472 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2005 | 2–5 | 28.6% | #349 | 1,525 | 0 | 5 | 1999 | 14–23 | 37.8% | #40 | 1,584 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2006 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #587 | 1,499 | 0 | 5 | 2000 | 23–28 | 45.1% | #34 | 1,698 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2001 | 22–30 | 42.3% | #40 | 1,664 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2008 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #179 | 1,480 | 0 | 5 | 2002 | 34–31 | 52.3% | #23 | 1,752 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2009 | 6–9 | 40.0% | #56 | 1,527 | 0 | 5 | 2003 | 7–13 | 35.0% | #114 | 1,636 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2010 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #138 | 1,513 | 0 | 5 | 2004 | 8–14 | 36.4% | #77 | 1,595 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2011 | 15–16 | 48.4% | #66 | 1,592 | 0 | 6 | 2005 | 8–15 | 34.8% | #91 | 1,519 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2012 | 3–9 | 25.0% | #258 | 1,516 | 0 | 6 | 2006 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #376 | 1,470 | 0 | 0 |