H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Julia Goerges vs Nadia Petrova H2H: 0-1
Nadia Petrova holds a 1–0 lead over Julia Goerges in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Nadia Petrova leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Nadia Petrova won the 2013 Indian Wells third round 6-1 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
RUS
Age 44
Right-Handed
178 cm / 5'10"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 7, 2013* | Indian Wells | WTA 1000 | R32 | Hard | Nadia Petrova | 6-1 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 |
| Nadia Petrova | #578 | #3 | 3,882 | 2,077 | 441 | 276 | 61.5% | 0 | 3 | 1 | 7 | 2 | 13 |
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 | Nadia Petrova | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1998 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #145 | 1,536 | 0 | 0 |
| 2008 | 6–7 | 46.2% | #108 | 1,557 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #93 | 1,568 | 0 | 0 |
| 2009 | 9–11 | 45.0% | #77 | 1,588 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 12–15 | 44.4% | #60 | 1,624 | 0 | 0 |
| 2010 | 29–22 | 56.9% | #40 | 1,760 | 0 | 1 | 2001 | 20–21 | 48.8% | #39 | 1,682 | 0 | 0 |
| 2011 | 36–24 | 60.0% | #21 | 1,772 | 0 | 2 | 2002 | 7–5 | 58.3% | #112 | 1,758 | 0 | 0 |
| 2012 | 34–25 | 57.6% | #18 | 1,751 | 0 | 2 | 2003 | 36–20 | 64.3% | #12 | 1,924 | 0 | 0 |
| 2013 | 14–27 | 34.1% | #72 | 1,535 | 0 | 2 | 2004 | 39–24 | 61.9% | #12 | 1,880 | 0 | 0 |
| 2014 | 15–18 | 45.5% | #74 | 1,596 | 0 | 2 | 2005 | 56–25 | 69.1% | #9 | 1,945 | 0 | 1 |
| 2015 | 17–20 | 45.9% | #50 | 1,612 | 0 | 2 | 2006 | 48–19 | 71.6% | #6 | 1,990 | 0 | 6 |
| 2016 | 22–20 | 52.4% | #53 | 1,671 | 0 | 2 | 2007 | 37–18 | 67.3% | #14 | 1,931 | 0 | 7 |
| 2017 | 42–22 | 65.6% | #14 | 1,880 | 0 | 4 | 2008 | 47–24 | 66.2% | #11 | 1,923 | 0 | 9 |
| 2018 | 44–22 | 66.7% | #14 | 1,861 | 0 | 6 | 2009 | 30–21 | 58.8% | #20 | 1,821 | 0 | 9 |
| 2019 | 26–20 | 56.5% | #28 | 1,799 | 0 | 7 | 2010 | 32–20 | 61.5% | #15 | 1,828 | 0 | 9 |
| 2020 | 6–6 | 50.0% | #45 | 1,761 | 0 | 7 | 2011 | 25–21 | 54.3% | #29 | 1,781 | 0 | 10 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2012 | 37–18 | 67.3% | #12 | 1,917 | 0 | 13 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2013 | 9–13 | 40.9% | #104 | 1,718 | 0 | 13 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2014 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #362 | 1,648 | 0 | 13 |