H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Johanna Konta vs Vania King H2H: 2-0
Johanna Konta holds a 2–0 lead over Vania King in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Johanna Konta leads 2–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Johanna Konta won the 2017 Shenzhen fourth round 1-6 6-3 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
2
–
0
2 main draw meetings
USA
Age 37
Right-Handed
165 cm / 5'5"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 5, 2017* | Shenzhen | WTA 250 | R16 | Hard | Johanna Konta | 1-6 6-3 6-2 | Vania King | Match data |
| Jul 28, 2016* | Montreal | WTA 1000 | R32 | Hard | Johanna Konta | 7-5 6-1 | Vania King | 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 |
| Vania King | #824 | #50 | 1,225 | 1,760 | 128 | 160 | 44.4% | 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 | Vania King | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2005 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #164 | 1,520 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2006 | 16–13 | 55.2% | #60 | 1,661 | 0 | 1 |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2007 | 15–21 | 41.7% | #109 | 1,608 | 0 | 1 |
| 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2008 | 7–19 | 26.9% | #128 | 1,512 | 0 | 1 |
| 20 | 2011 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #308 | 1,494 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 11–12 | 47.8% | #80 | 1,588 | 0 | 1 |
| 21 | 2012 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #156 | 1,506 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 14–17 | 45.2% | #86 | 1,595 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 2013 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #114 | 1,505 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 13–14 | 48.1% | #76 | 1,689 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 2014 | 2–8 | 20.0% | #148 | 1,459 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 15–19 | 44.1% | #69 | 1,614 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 2015 | 13–8 | 61.9% | #48 | 1,694 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 8–11 | 42.1% | #85 | 1,630 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 2016 | 42–22 | 65.6% | #10 | 1,854 | 0 | 1 | 2014 | 13–15 | 46.4% | #111 | 1,641 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2017 | 36–17 | 67.9% | #9 | 1,836 | 0 | 3 | 2015 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #410 | 1,627 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2018 | 25–23 | 52.1% | #37 | 1,794 | 0 | 3 | 2016 | 13–11 | 54.2% | #78 | 1,643 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2019 | 33–15 | 68.8% | #12 | 1,925 | 0 | 3 | 2017 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #492 | 1,590 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 2020 | 8–9 | 47.1% | #14 | 1,825 | 0 | 3 | 2018 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #356 | 1,559 | 0 | 1 |
| 30 | 2021 | 10–9 | 52.6% | #113 | 1,807 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |