H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Kiki Bertens vs Nadia Petrova H2H: 1-1
Kiki Bertens and Nadia Petrova are tied 1–1 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Nadia Petrova leads 1–0 on grass, while Kiki Bertens leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Kiki Bertens won the 2012 Montreal second round 3-6 7-6(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.
NED
Age 34
Right-Handed
182 cm / 6'0"
H2H
1
–
1
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 8, 2012* | Montreal | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard | Kiki Bertens | 3-6 7-6(4) 6-4 | Nadia Petrova | Match data |
| Jun 21, 2012* | 's Hertogenbosch | WTA 250 | R32 | Grass | Nadia Petrova | 6-2 6-4 | Kiki Bertens | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kiki Bertens | #25 | #4 | 5,430 | 2,015 | 214 | 168 | 56.0% | 0 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 6 | 11 |
| 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 | Kiki Bertens | Nadia Petrova | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1998 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #145 | 1,536 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1999 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #93 | 1,568 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2000 | 12–15 | 44.4% | #60 | 1,624 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2011 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #182 | 1,493 | 0 | 0 | 2001 | 20–21 | 48.8% | #39 | 1,682 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2012 | 11–12 | 47.8% | #63 | 1,581 | 0 | 1 | 2002 | 7–5 | 58.3% | #112 | 1,758 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2013 | 14–19 | 42.4% | #87 | 1,552 | 0 | 1 | 2003 | 36–20 | 64.3% | #12 | 1,924 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2014 | 11–14 | 44.0% | #68 | 1,580 | 0 | 1 | 2004 | 39–24 | 61.9% | #12 | 1,880 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2015 | 7–17 | 29.2% | #104 | 1,520 | 0 | 1 | 2005 | 56–25 | 69.1% | #9 | 1,945 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 2016 | 27–19 | 58.7% | #22 | 1,723 | 0 | 2 | 2006 | 48–19 | 71.6% | #6 | 1,990 | 0 | 6 |
| 25 | 2017 | 30–26 | 53.6% | #31 | 1,684 | 0 | 5 | 2007 | 37–18 | 67.3% | #14 | 1,931 | 0 | 7 |
| 26 | 2018 | 46–22 | 67.6% | #9 | 1,912 | 0 | 8 | 2008 | 47–24 | 66.2% | #11 | 1,923 | 0 | 9 |
| 27 | 2019 | 54–25 | 68.4% | #9 | 1,897 | 0 | 10 | 2009 | 30–21 | 58.8% | #20 | 1,821 | 0 | 9 |
| 28 | 2020 | 13–6 | 68.4% | #9 | 1,883 | 0 | 11 | 2010 | 32–20 | 61.5% | #15 | 1,828 | 0 | 9 |
| 29 | 2021 | 1–7 | 12.5% | #25 | 1,749 | 0 | 11 | 2011 | 25–21 | 54.3% | #29 | 1,781 | 0 | 10 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2012 | 37–18 | 67.3% | #12 | 1,917 | 0 | 13 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2013 | 9–13 | 40.9% | #104 | 1,718 | 0 | 13 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2014 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #362 | 1,648 | 0 | 13 |