H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Julia Goerges vs Mirjana Lucic-Baroni H2H: 0-1
Mirjana Lucic-Baroni holds a 1–0 lead over Julia Goerges in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Mirjana Lucic-Baroni leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Mirjana Lucic-Baroni won the 2014 Quebec City semifinal 6-4 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.
GER
Right-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
CRO
Age 44
Right-Handed
181 cm / 5'11"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 13, 2014* | Quebec City | WTA 250 | SF | Hard | Mirjana Lucic-Baroni | 6-4 5-7 6-2 | Julia Goerges | 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 |
| Mirjana Lucic-Baroni | #424 | #20 | 1,924 | 1,798 | 136 | 166 | 45.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
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 | Mirjana Lucic-Baroni | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1997 | 11–3 | 78.6% | #49 | 1,692 | 0 | 1 |
| 2008 | 6–7 | 46.2% | #108 | 1,557 | 0 | 0 | 1998 | 15–11 | 57.7% | #51 | 1,776 | 0 | 2 |
| 2009 | 9–11 | 45.0% | #77 | 1,588 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 11–13 | 45.8% | #48 | 1,757 | 0 | 2 |
| 2010 | 29–22 | 56.9% | #40 | 1,760 | 0 | 1 | 2000 | 2–12 | 14.3% | #202 | 1,601 | 0 | 2 |
| 2011 | 36–24 | 60.0% | #21 | 1,772 | 0 | 2 | 2001 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #192 | 1,596 | 0 | 2 |
| 2012 | 34–25 | 57.6% | #18 | 1,751 | 0 | 2 | 2002 | 1–6 | 14.3% | #203 | 1,546 | 0 | 2 |
| 2013 | 14–27 | 34.1% | #72 | 1,535 | 0 | 2 | 2003 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #348 | 1,526 | 0 | 2 |
| 2014 | 15–18 | 45.5% | #74 | 1,596 | 0 | 2 | 2007 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #455 | 1,538 | 0 | 2 |
| 2015 | 17–20 | 45.9% | #50 | 1,612 | 0 | 2 | 2009 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #258 | 1,519 | 0 | 2 |
| 2016 | 22–20 | 52.4% | #53 | 1,671 | 0 | 2 | 2010 | 5–6 | 45.5% | #96 | 1,554 | 0 | 2 |
| 2017 | 42–22 | 65.6% | #14 | 1,880 | 0 | 4 | 2011 | 8–14 | 36.4% | #129 | 1,551 | 0 | 2 |
| 2018 | 44–22 | 66.7% | #14 | 1,861 | 0 | 6 | 2012 | 7–12 | 36.8% | #105 | 1,535 | 0 | 2 |
| 2019 | 26–20 | 56.5% | #28 | 1,799 | 0 | 7 | 2013 | 8–11 | 42.1% | #110 | 1,563 | 0 | 2 |
| 2020 | 6–6 | 50.0% | #45 | 1,761 | 0 | 7 | 2014 | 12–8 | 60.0% | #60 | 1,706 | 0 | 3 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2015 | 17–26 | 39.5% | #68 | 1,657 | 0 | 3 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2016 | 14–18 | 43.8% | #80 | 1,629 | 0 | 3 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2017 | 20–16 | 55.6% | #32 | 1,698 | 0 | 3 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2018 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #327 | 1,689 | 0 | 3 |