H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Johanna Konta vs Tsvetana Pironkova H2H: 1-0
Johanna Konta holds a 1–0 lead over Tsvetana Pironkova in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Johanna Konta leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Johanna Konta won the 2016 US Open second round 6-2 5-7 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.
GBR
Age 35
Right-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
BUL
Age 38
Right-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 1, 2016* | US Open | Grand Slam | R64 | Hard | Johanna Konta | 6-2 5-7 6-2 | Tsvetana Pironkova | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Johanna Konta | #113 | #4 | 5,110 | 1,990 | 174 | 120 | 59.2% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 4 |
| Tsvetana Pironkova | #1,170 | #31 | 1,805 | 1,770 | 169 | 222 | 43.2% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 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 | Johanna Konta | Tsvetana Pironkova | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2005 | 6–3 | 66.7% | #86 | 1,599 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2006 | 15–16 | 48.4% | #64 | 1,662 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2007 | 7–15 | 31.8% | #95 | 1,596 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2011 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #308 | 1,494 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 15–17 | 46.9% | #44 | 1,631 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2012 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #156 | 1,506 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 9–20 | 31.0% | #97 | 1,546 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2013 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #114 | 1,505 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 16–15 | 51.6% | #35 | 1,623 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2014 | 2–8 | 20.0% | #148 | 1,459 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 13–22 | 37.1% | #46 | 1,644 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2015 | 13–8 | 61.9% | #48 | 1,694 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 19–23 | 45.2% | #42 | 1,658 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2016 | 42–22 | 65.6% | #10 | 1,854 | 0 | 1 | 2013 | 9–21 | 30.0% | #108 | 1,561 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2017 | 36–17 | 67.9% | #9 | 1,836 | 0 | 3 | 2014 | 17–19 | 47.2% | #38 | 1,619 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2018 | 25–23 | 52.1% | #37 | 1,794 | 0 | 3 | 2015 | 18–21 | 46.2% | #59 | 1,633 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2019 | 33–15 | 68.8% | #12 | 1,925 | 0 | 3 | 2016 | 10–12 | 45.5% | #64 | 1,671 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 2020 | 8–9 | 47.1% | #14 | 1,825 | 0 | 3 | 2017 | 6–10 | 37.5% | #165 | 1,639 | 0 | 1 |
| 30 | 2021 | 10–9 | 52.6% | #113 | 1,807 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2020 | 6–2 | 75.0% | #136 | 1,739 | 0 | 1 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2021 | 3–6 | 33.3% | #252 | 1,706 | 0 | 1 |