H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Kaia Kanepi vs Nadia Petrova H2H: 0-2
Nadia Petrova holds a 2–0 lead over Kaia Kanepi in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Nadia Petrova leads 1–0 on clay and 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Nadia Petrova won the 2010 Australian Open second round 6-4 6-4.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
EST
Age 41
Right-Handed
179 cm / 5'10"
H2H
0
–
2
2 main draw meetings
RUS
Age 44
Right-Handed
178 cm / 5'10"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 21, 2010* | Australian Open | Grand Slam | R64 | Hard | Nadia Petrova | 6-4 6-4 | Kaia Kanepi | Match data |
| Apr 5, 2007* | Amelia Island | WTA 500 | R32 | Clay | Nadia Petrova | 6-4 6-0 | Kaia Kanepi | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kaia Kanepi | #1,322 | #15 | 2,760 | 1,912 | 261 | 235 | 52.6% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 4 |
| 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.
| Age | Kaia Kanepi | Nadia Petrova | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | 2001 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #200 | 1,496 | 0 | 0 | 1998 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #145 | 1,536 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 2002 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #285 | 1,498 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #93 | 1,568 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2000 | 12–15 | 44.4% | #60 | 1,624 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2001 | 20–21 | 48.8% | #39 | 1,682 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2005 | 3–2 | 60.0% | #98 | 1,538 | 0 | 0 | 2002 | 7–5 | 58.3% | #112 | 1,758 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2006 | 14–16 | 46.7% | #78 | 1,610 | 0 | 0 | 2003 | 36–20 | 64.3% | #12 | 1,924 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2007 | 13–17 | 43.3% | #75 | 1,583 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 39–24 | 61.9% | #12 | 1,880 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2008 | 28–20 | 58.3% | #27 | 1,747 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 56–25 | 69.1% | #9 | 1,945 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 2009 | 15–21 | 41.7% | #58 | 1,598 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 48–19 | 71.6% | #6 | 1,990 | 0 | 6 |
| 25 | 2010 | 29–17 | 63.0% | #22 | 1,839 | 0 | 1 | 2007 | 37–18 | 67.3% | #14 | 1,931 | 0 | 7 |
| 26 | 2011 | 19–17 | 52.8% | #34 | 1,816 | 0 | 1 | 2008 | 47–24 | 66.2% | #11 | 1,923 | 0 | 9 |
| 27 | 2012 | 25–9 | 73.5% | #19 | 1,868 | 0 | 3 | 2009 | 30–21 | 58.8% | #20 | 1,821 | 0 | 9 |
| 28 | 2013 | 21–10 | 67.7% | #30 | 1,841 | 0 | 4 | 2010 | 32–20 | 61.5% | #15 | 1,828 | 0 | 9 |
| 29 | 2014 | 17–19 | 47.2% | #51 | 1,718 | 0 | 4 | 2011 | 25–21 | 54.3% | #29 | 1,781 | 0 | 10 |
| 30 | 2015 | 8–12 | 40.0% | #122 | 1,649 | 0 | 4 | 2012 | 37–18 | 67.3% | #12 | 1,917 | 0 | 13 |
| 31 | 2016 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #376 | 1,655 | 0 | 4 | 2013 | 9–13 | 40.9% | #104 | 1,718 | 0 | 13 |
| 32 | 2017 | 4–2 | 66.7% | #100 | 1,725 | 0 | 4 | 2014 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #362 | 1,648 | 0 | 13 |
| 33 | 2018 | 11–11 | 50.0% | #61 | 1,776 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 34 | 2019 | 9–10 | 47.4% | #101 | 1,748 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 35 | 2020 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #93 | 1,719 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 36 | 2021 | 11–12 | 47.8% | #73 | 1,703 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 37 | 2022 | 24–16 | 60.0% | #32 | 1,801 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 38 | 2023 | 6–16 | 27.3% | #168 | 1,607 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |