H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 04:32 UTC
Jelena Ostapenko vs Shahar Peer H2H: 1-0
Jelena Ostapenko holds a 1–0 lead over Shahar Peer in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Jelena Ostapenko leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Jelena Ostapenko won the 2014 Tashkent third round 6-3 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.
LAT
Age 29
Right-Handed
177 cm / 5'10"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
ISR
Age 39
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 11, 2014* | Tashkent | WTA 250 | R32 | Hard | Jelena Ostapenko | 6-3 7-5 | Shahar Peer | 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 Ostapenko | #29 | #5 | 5,611 | 2,028 | 289 | 210 | 57.9% | 1 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 4 | 9 |
| Shahar Peer | #1,185 | #11 | 3,410 | 1,966 | 268 | 204 | 56.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 5 |
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 Ostapenko | Shahar Peer | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 2014 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #271 | 1,505 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 3–3 | 50.0% | #176 | 1,509 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2015 | 6–5 | 54.5% | #84 | 1,563 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 22–20 | 52.4% | #45 | 1,636 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2016 | 20–22 | 47.6% | #44 | 1,602 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 38–20 | 65.5% | #20 | 1,826 | 0 | 3 |
| 20 | 2017 | 41–20 | 67.2% | #7 | 1,887 | 1 | 2 | 2007 | 39–21 | 65.0% | #17 | 1,830 | 0 | 3 |
| 21 | 2018 | 21–20 | 51.2% | #22 | 1,752 | 1 | 2 | 2008 | 24–20 | 54.5% | #38 | 1,707 | 0 | 3 |
| 22 | 2019 | 25–25 | 50.0% | #45 | 1,795 | 1 | 3 | 2009 | 36–21 | 63.2% | #30 | 1,787 | 0 | 5 |
| 23 | 2020 | 8–7 | 53.3% | #44 | 1,793 | 1 | 3 | 2010 | 47–21 | 69.1% | #13 | 1,885 | 0 | 5 |
| 24 | 2021 | 31–18 | 63.3% | #28 | 1,896 | 1 | 4 | 2011 | 23–21 | 52.3% | #37 | 1,706 | 0 | 5 |
| 25 | 2022 | 31–19 | 62.0% | #18 | 1,844 | 1 | 5 | 2012 | 15–22 | 40.5% | #74 | 1,584 | 0 | 5 |
| 26 | 2023 | 38–22 | 63.3% | #13 | 1,912 | 1 | 6 | 2013 | 10–14 | 41.7% | #77 | 1,558 | 0 | 5 |
| 27 | 2024 | 29–17 | 63.0% | #15 | 1,842 | 1 | 8 | 2014 | 10–18 | 35.7% | #117 | 1,539 | 0 | 5 |
| 28 | 2025 | 17–19 | 47.2% | #23 | 1,773 | 1 | 9 | 2015 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #177 | 1,526 | 0 | 5 |
| 29 | 2026 | 21–15 | 58.3% | #29 | 1,869 | 1 | 9 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |