H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 08:25 UTC
Kai-Chen Chang vs Iveta Benesova H2H: 1-2
Iveta Benesova holds a 2–1 lead over Kai-Chen Chang in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Iveta Benesova leads 2–1 on hard courts. Most recently, Kai-Chen Chang won the 2012 Washington third round 6-3 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.
TPE
Right-Handed
167 cm / 5'6"
H2H
1
–
2
3 main draw meetings
CZE
Age 43
Left-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 30, 2012 | Washington | WTA 250 | R32 | Hard | Kai-Chen Chang | 6-3 6-2 | Iveta Benesova | Match data |
| Jan 20, 2010* | Australian Open | Grand Slam | R128 | Hard | Iveta Benesova | 7-5 6-2 | Kai-Chen Chang | Match data |
| Oct 2, 2009* | Tokyo | WTA 1000 | R16 | Hard | Iveta Benesova | 7-5 6-2 | Kai-Chen Chang | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kai-Chen Chang | #1,233 | #82 | 808 | 1,647 | 32 | 59 | 35.2% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Iveta Benesova | #671 | #25 | 1,811 | 1,760 | 177 | 221 | 44.5% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
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.
| Kai-Chen Chang | Iveta Benesova | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles |
| 2009 | 5–5 | 50.0% | #94 | 1,558 | 0 | 0 | 2002 | 6–9 | 40.0% | #82 | 1,565 | 0 | 0 |
| 2010 | 9–15 | 37.5% | #117 | 1,564 | 0 | 0 | 2003 | 9–19 | 32.1% | #132 | 1,478 | 0 | 0 |
| 2011 | 1–8 | 11.1% | #148 | 1,487 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 25–19 | 56.8% | #36 | 1,657 | 0 | 1 |
| 2012 | 9–11 | 45.0% | #86 | 1,579 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 21–27 | 43.8% | #55 | 1,613 | 0 | 1 |
| 2013 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #621 | 1,532 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 17–21 | 44.7% | #58 | 1,594 | 0 | 1 |
| 2015 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #134 | 1,530 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 6–14 | 30.0% | #116 | 1,522 | 0 | 1 |
| 2016 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #131 | 1,604 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 20–17 | 54.1% | #43 | 1,641 | 0 | 1 |
| 2017 | 2–9 | 18.2% | #219 | 1,539 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 29–25 | 53.7% | #38 | 1,646 | 0 | 1 |
| 2018 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #401 | 1,538 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 18–24 | 42.9% | #59 | 1,636 | 0 | 2 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2011 | 16–24 | 40.0% | #54 | 1,650 | 0 | 2 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2012 | 10–17 | 37.0% | #81 | 1,587 | 0 | 2 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2014 | 0–5 | 0.0% | #671 | 1,526 | 0 | 2 |