H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 17:48 UTC
Julia Goerges vs Tamira Paszek H2H: 3-1
Julia Goerges holds a 3–1 lead over Tamira Paszek in their WTA head-to-head. Across 4 main-draw meetings, Julia Goerges leads 3–1 on hard courts. Most recently, Julia Goerges won the 2016 Auckland semifinal 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
3
–
1
4 main draw meetings
Age 35
Right-Handed
165 cm / 5'5"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 9, 2016* | Auckland | WTA 250 | SF | Hard | Julia Goerges | 6-4 6-2 | Tamira Paszek | Match data |
| Aug 8, 2012* | Montreal | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard | Tamira Paszek | 6-2 6-1 | Julia Goerges | Match data |
| Oct 21, 2011* | Luxembourg | WTA 250 | R16 | Hard | Julia Goerges | 6-4 6-2 | Tamira Paszek | Match data |
| Jan 20, 2010* | Australian Open | Grand Slam | R128 | Hard | Julia Goerges | 6-0 3-6 6-3 | Tamira Paszek | 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 |
| Tamira Paszek | — | — | — | 1,801 | 99 | 128 | 43.6% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 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 | Tamira Paszek | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 2005 | 1–1 | 50.0% | — | 1,512 | 0 | 0 |
| 2008 | 6–7 | 46.2% | #108 | 1,557 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 6–2 | 75.0% | — | 1,598 | 0 | 1 |
| 2009 | 9–11 | 45.0% | #77 | 1,588 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 15–14 | 51.7% | — | 1,730 | 0 | 1 |
| 2010 | 29–22 | 56.9% | #40 | 1,760 | 0 | 1 | 2008 | 16–18 | 47.1% | — | 1,697 | 0 | 1 |
| 2011 | 36–24 | 60.0% | #21 | 1,772 | 0 | 2 | 2009 | 5–9 | 35.7% | — | 1,626 | 0 | 1 |
| 2012 | 34–25 | 57.6% | #18 | 1,751 | 0 | 2 | 2010 | 9–9 | 50.0% | — | 1,641 | 0 | 2 |
| 2013 | 14–27 | 34.1% | #72 | 1,535 | 0 | 2 | 2011 | 19–21 | 47.5% | — | 1,664 | 0 | 2 |
| 2014 | 15–18 | 45.5% | #74 | 1,596 | 0 | 2 | 2012 | 18–20 | 47.4% | — | 1,687 | 0 | 3 |
| 2015 | 17–20 | 45.9% | #50 | 1,612 | 0 | 2 | 2013 | 2–17 | 10.5% | — | 1,483 | 0 | 3 |
| 2016 | 22–20 | 52.4% | #53 | 1,671 | 0 | 2 | 2014 | 1–4 | 20.0% | — | 1,475 | 0 | 3 |
| 2017 | 42–22 | 65.6% | #14 | 1,880 | 0 | 4 | 2015 | 1–4 | 20.0% | — | 1,447 | 0 | 3 |
| 2018 | 44–22 | 66.7% | #14 | 1,861 | 0 | 6 | 2016 | 6–9 | 40.0% | — | 1,498 | 0 | 3 |
| 2019 | 26–20 | 56.5% | #28 | 1,799 | 0 | 7 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2020 | 6–6 | 50.0% | #45 | 1,761 | 0 | 7 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |