H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 08:25 UTC
Julia Goerges vs Anastasia Rodionova H2H: 1-0
Julia Goerges holds a 1–0 lead over Anastasia Rodionova in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Julia Goerges leads 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Julia Goerges won the 2009 Birmingham second round 6-4 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.
GER
Right-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
AUS
Age 44
Right-Handed
167 cm / 5'6"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 10, 2009* | Birmingham | WTA 250 | R64 | Grass | Julia Goerges | 6-4 6-2 | Anastasia Rodionova | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Julia Goerges | #45 | #9 | 3,980 | 1,940 | 304 | 249 | 55.0% | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 7 |
| Anastasia Rodionova | #872 | #62 | 1,095 | 1,649 | 86 | 150 | 36.4% | 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.
| Julia Goerges | Anastasia Rodionova | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles |
| 2007 | 4–5 | 44.4% | #126 | 1,543 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #239 | 1,491 | 0 | 0 |
| 2008 | 6–7 | 46.2% | #108 | 1,557 | 0 | 0 | 2001 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #195 | 1,468 | 0 | 0 |
| 2009 | 9–11 | 45.0% | #77 | 1,588 | 0 | 0 | 2002 | 5–3 | 62.5% | #118 | 1,521 | 0 | 0 |
| 2010 | 29–22 | 56.9% | #40 | 1,760 | 0 | 1 | 2003 | 7–8 | 46.7% | #165 | 1,546 | 0 | 0 |
| 2011 | 36–24 | 60.0% | #21 | 1,772 | 0 | 2 | 2004 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #212 | 1,530 | 0 | 0 |
| 2012 | 34–25 | 57.6% | #18 | 1,751 | 0 | 2 | 2005 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #140 | 1,517 | 0 | 0 |
| 2013 | 14–27 | 34.1% | #72 | 1,535 | 0 | 2 | 2006 | 10–15 | 40.0% | #94 | 1,526 | 0 | 0 |
| 2014 | 15–18 | 45.5% | #74 | 1,596 | 0 | 2 | 2007 | 11–20 | 35.5% | #78 | 1,525 | 0 | 0 |
| 2015 | 17–20 | 45.9% | #50 | 1,612 | 0 | 2 | 2008 | 8–20 | 28.6% | #98 | 1,503 | 0 | 0 |
| 2016 | 22–20 | 52.4% | #53 | 1,671 | 0 | 2 | 2009 | 5–9 | 35.7% | #95 | 1,522 | 0 | 0 |
| 2017 | 42–22 | 65.6% | #14 | 1,880 | 0 | 4 | 2010 | 17–20 | 45.9% | #64 | 1,606 | 0 | 0 |
| 2018 | 44–22 | 66.7% | #14 | 1,861 | 0 | 6 | 2011 | 8–21 | 27.6% | #108 | 1,573 | 0 | 0 |
| 2019 | 26–20 | 56.5% | #28 | 1,799 | 0 | 7 | 2012 | 6–13 | 31.6% | #139 | 1,539 | 0 | 0 |
| 2020 | 6–6 | 50.0% | #45 | 1,761 | 0 | 7 | 2013 | 2–7 | 22.2% | #162 | 1,502 | 0 | 0 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2014 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #185 | 1,514 | 0 | 0 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2015 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #235 | 1,509 | 0 | 0 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2016 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #797 | 1,476 | 0 | 0 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2017 | 2–1 | 66.7% | #390 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 |