H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Julia Goerges vs Jana Cepelova H2H: 3-0
Julia Goerges holds a 3–0 lead over Jana Cepelova in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Julia Goerges leads 2–0 on hard courts and 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Julia Goerges won the 2016 Gstaad third round 6-0 6-3.
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
3
–
0
3 main draw meetings
SVK
Age 33
Right-Handed
168 cm / 5'6"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 14, 2016* | Gstaad | WTA 250 | R32 | Clay | Julia Goerges | 6-0 6-3 | Jana Cepelova | Match data |
| Mar 24, 2015* | Miami | WTA 1000 | R128 | Hard | Julia Goerges | 6-1 6-0 | Jana Cepelova | Match data |
| Mar 4, 2014* | Indian Wells | WTA 1000 | R128 | Hard | Julia Goerges | 6-1 2-6 6-3 | Jana Cepelova | 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 |
| Jana Cepelova | #894 | #50 | 1,074 | 1,685 | 55 | 91 | 37.7% | 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 | Jana Cepelova | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 2011 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #201 | 1,486 | 0 | 0 |
| 2008 | 6–7 | 46.2% | #108 | 1,557 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 5–5 | 50.0% | #111 | 1,536 | 0 | 0 |
| 2009 | 9–11 | 45.0% | #77 | 1,588 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 7–14 | 33.3% | #76 | 1,511 | 0 | 0 |
| 2010 | 29–22 | 56.9% | #40 | 1,760 | 0 | 1 | 2014 | 18–19 | 48.6% | #56 | 1,600 | 0 | 0 |
| 2011 | 36–24 | 60.0% | #21 | 1,772 | 0 | 2 | 2015 | 5–10 | 33.3% | #147 | 1,575 | 0 | 0 |
| 2012 | 34–25 | 57.6% | #18 | 1,751 | 0 | 2 | 2016 | 9–12 | 42.9% | #100 | 1,634 | 0 | 0 |
| 2013 | 14–27 | 34.1% | #72 | 1,535 | 0 | 2 | 2017 | 8–20 | 28.6% | #108 | 1,638 | 0 | 0 |
| 2014 | 15–18 | 45.5% | #74 | 1,596 | 0 | 2 | 2018 | 2–5 | 28.6% | #188 | 1,631 | 0 | 0 |
| 2015 | 17–20 | 45.9% | #50 | 1,612 | 0 | 2 | 2019 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #158 | 1,621 | 0 | 0 |
| 2016 | 22–20 | 52.4% | #53 | 1,671 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2017 | 42–22 | 65.6% | #14 | 1,880 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2018 | 44–22 | 66.7% | #14 | 1,861 | 0 | 6 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2019 | 26–20 | 56.5% | #28 | 1,799 | 0 | 7 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2020 | 6–6 | 50.0% | #45 | 1,761 | 0 | 7 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |