H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Kiki Bertens vs Tamira Paszek H2H: 2-0
Kiki Bertens holds a 2–0 lead over Tamira Paszek in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Kiki Bertens leads 1–0 on carpet and 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Kiki Bertens won the 2016 Gstaad third round 5-7 6-2 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
2
–
0
2 main draw meetings
Age 35
Right-Handed
165 cm / 5'5"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 14, 2016* | Gstaad | WTA 250 | R32 | Clay | Kiki Bertens | 5-7 6-2 6-4 | Tamira Paszek | Match data |
| Jan 31, 2013* | Paris | WTA 500 | R32 | Carpet | Kiki Bertens | 6-4 7-5 | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kiki Bertens | #25 | #4 | 5,430 | 2,015 | 214 | 168 | 56.0% | 0 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 6 | 11 |
| 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.
| Age | Kiki Bertens | Tamira Paszek | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 14 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2005 | 1–1 | 50.0% | — | 1,512 | 0 | 0 |
| 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2006 | 6–2 | 75.0% | — | 1,598 | 0 | 1 |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2007 | 15–14 | 51.7% | — | 1,730 | 0 | 1 |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2008 | 16–18 | 47.1% | — | 1,697 | 0 | 1 |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2009 | 5–9 | 35.7% | — | 1,626 | 0 | 1 |
| 19 | 2011 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #182 | 1,493 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 9–9 | 50.0% | — | 1,641 | 0 | 2 |
| 20 | 2012 | 11–12 | 47.8% | #63 | 1,581 | 0 | 1 | 2011 | 19–21 | 47.5% | — | 1,664 | 0 | 2 |
| 21 | 2013 | 14–19 | 42.4% | #87 | 1,552 | 0 | 1 | 2012 | 18–20 | 47.4% | — | 1,687 | 0 | 3 |
| 22 | 2014 | 11–14 | 44.0% | #68 | 1,580 | 0 | 1 | 2013 | 2–17 | 10.5% | — | 1,483 | 0 | 3 |
| 23 | 2015 | 7–17 | 29.2% | #104 | 1,520 | 0 | 1 | 2014 | 1–4 | 20.0% | — | 1,475 | 0 | 3 |
| 24 | 2016 | 27–19 | 58.7% | #22 | 1,723 | 0 | 2 | 2015 | 1–4 | 20.0% | — | 1,447 | 0 | 3 |
| 25 | 2017 | 30–26 | 53.6% | #31 | 1,684 | 0 | 5 | 2016 | 6–9 | 40.0% | — | 1,498 | 0 | 3 |
| 26 | 2018 | 46–22 | 67.6% | #9 | 1,912 | 0 | 8 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 27 | 2019 | 54–25 | 68.4% | #9 | 1,897 | 0 | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 2020 | 13–6 | 68.4% | #9 | 1,883 | 0 | 11 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 2021 | 1–7 | 12.5% | #25 | 1,749 | 0 | 11 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |