H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Jelena Kostanic Tosic vs Conchita Martínez H2H: 0-3
Conchita Martínez holds a 3–0 lead over Jelena Kostanic Tosic in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Conchita Martínez leads 3–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Conchita Martínez won the 2003 Doha third round 6-2 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.
CRO
Age 45
Left-Handed
168 cm / 5'6"
H2H
0
–
3
3 main draw meetings
ESP
Age 54
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 13, 2003* | Doha | WTA 1000 | R32 | Hard | Conchita Martínez | 6-2 6-2 | Jelena Kostanic Tosic | Match data |
| Sep 26, 2002* | Bali | WTA 250 | R32 | Hard | Conchita Martínez | 6-2 6-4 | Jelena Kostanic Tosic | Match data |
| Jan 23, 2000* | Australian Open | Grand Slam | R32 | Hard | Conchita Martínez | 6-4 6-4 | Jelena Kostanic Tosic | 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 Kostanic Tosic | #937 | #32 | 900 | 1,726 | 112 | 151 | 42.6% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Conchita Martínez | #1,498 | #2 | 3,180 | 2,263 | 669 | 275 | 70.9% | 1 | 9 | 0 | 4 | 19 | 33 |
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 Kostanic Tosic | Conchita Martínez | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | 1998 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #240 | 1,490 | 0 | 0 | 1988 | 14–6 | 70.0% | #41 | 1,730 | 0 | 1 |
| 17 | 1999 | 4–5 | 44.4% | #97 | 1,512 | 0 | 0 | 1989 | 35–9 | 79.5% | #7 | 1,933 | 0 | 4 |
| 18 | 2000 | 10–13 | 43.5% | #114 | 1,523 | 0 | 0 | 1990 | 38–10 | 79.2% | #11 | 2,063 | 0 | 7 |
| 19 | 2001 | 4–4 | 50.0% | #131 | 1,559 | 0 | 0 | 1991 | 36–12 | 75.0% | #9 | 2,076 | 0 | 10 |
| 20 | 2002 | 14–17 | 45.2% | #70 | 1,570 | 0 | 0 | 1992 | 44–16 | 73.3% | #8 | 2,054 | 0 | 11 |
| 21 | 2003 | 16–20 | 44.4% | #66 | 1,621 | 0 | 0 | 1993 | 66–13 | 83.5% | #4 | 2,158 | 0 | 16 |
| 22 | 2004 | 22–25 | 46.8% | #35 | 1,678 | 0 | 0 | 1994 | 51–14 | 78.5% | #3 | 2,065 | 1 | 20 |
| 23 | 2005 | 11–21 | 34.4% | #87 | 1,549 | 0 | 0 | 1995 | 57–10 | 85.1% | #2 | 2,182 | 1 | 26 |
| 24 | 2006 | 19–18 | 51.4% | #51 | 1,577 | 0 | 0 | 1996 | 44–16 | 73.3% | #4 | 2,074 | 1 | 28 |
| 25 | 2007 | 10–17 | 37.0% | #103 | 1,534 | 0 | 0 | 1997 | 37–19 | 66.1% | #12 | 2,011 | 1 | 28 |
| 26 | 2008 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #114 | 1,499 | 0 | 0 | 1998 | 38–16 | 70.4% | #8 | 1,968 | 1 | 30 |
| 27 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1999 | 38–22 | 63.3% | #15 | 1,898 | 1 | 31 |
| 28 | 2010 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #830 | 1,460 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 48–19 | 71.6% | #5 | 1,951 | 1 | 32 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2001 | 19–13 | 59.4% | #35 | 1,852 | 1 | 32 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2002 | 26–24 | 52.0% | #34 | 1,756 | 1 | 32 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2003 | 29–21 | 58.0% | #18 | 1,756 | 1 | 32 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2004 | 20–16 | 55.6% | #42 | 1,772 | 1 | 32 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2005 | 29–19 | 60.4% | #31 | 1,812 | 1 | 33 |