H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 04:32 UTC

Laura Siegemund vs Venus Williams H2H: 1-1

Laura Siegemund and Venus Williams are tied 1–1 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Laura Siegemund leads 1–0 on clay, while Venus Williams leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Laura Siegemund won the 2017 Charleston third round 6-4 6-7(3) 7-5.

Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.

Laura Siegemund
GER Age 38 Right-Handed 168 cm / 5'6"
H2H
1 – 1
2 main draw meetings
Venus Williams
USA Age 46 Right-Handed 185 cm / 6'1"

H2H Match Log

DateTournamentCategoryRoundSurfaceWinnerScoreLoserMatch
Apr 6, 2017* Charleston WTA 500 R32 Clay Laura Siegemund #37 6-4 6-7(3) 7-5 Venus Williams #10 Match data
Sep 4, 2016* US Open Grand Slam R32 Hard Venus Williams #6 6-1 6-2 Laura Siegemund #27 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
Laura Siegemund #87 #27 1,630 1,828 143 152 48.5% 0 0 0 1 1 2
Venus Williams #467 #1 7,452 2,362 768 288 72.7% 7 9 1 20 10 47

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 Laura Siegemund Venus Williams
YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles
14 — — — — — — — 1994 1–1 50.0% — 1,525 0 0
15 — — — — — — — 1995 2–3 40.0% #205 1,561 0 0
16 — — — — — — — 1996 2–5 28.6% #216 1,571 0 0
17 — — — — — — — 1997 20–13 60.6% #22 1,851 0 0
18 — — — — — — — 1998 50–13 79.4% #5 2,094 0 2
19 — — — — — — — 1999 57–11 83.8% #3 2,258 0 8
20 — — — — — — — 2000 35–4 89.7% #3 2,321 2 13
21 — — — — — — — 2001 46–6 88.5% #3 2,338 4 19
22 2010 0–1 0.0% #220 1,483 0 0 2002 63–9 87.5% #2 2,297 4 26
23 — — — — — — — 2003 24–5 82.8% #11 2,257 4 27
24 — — — — — — — 2004 40–13 75.5% #9 2,072 4 29
25 — — — — — — — 2005 34–10 77.3% #10 2,085 5 31
26 2014 1–2 33.3% #136 1,495 0 0 2006 13–6 68.4% #46 2,007 5 31
27 2015 5–7 41.7% #98 1,529 0 0 2007 46–10 82.1% #8 2,048 6 34
28 2016 27–17 61.4% #31 1,735 0 1 2008 37–10 78.7% #6 2,133 7 37
29 2017 14–12 53.8% #69 1,792 0 2 2009 38–16 70.4% #6 1,981 7 39
30 2018 8–11 42.1% #113 1,691 0 2 2010 38–7 84.4% #5 2,057 7 41
31 2019 15–20 42.9% #75 1,666 0 2 2011 8–4 66.7% #102 1,994 7 41
32 2020 11–9 55.0% #51 1,762 0 2 2012 22–8 73.3% #24 2,007 7 42
33 2021 8–13 38.1% #125 1,727 0 2 2013 15–11 57.7% #47 1,889 7 42
34 2022 3–7 30.0% #177 1,652 0 2 2014 33–15 68.8% #18 1,874 7 43
35 2023 13–11 54.2% #86 1,784 0 2 2015 39–14 73.6% #7 1,957 7 46
36 2024 17–16 51.5% #80 1,738 0 2 2016 24–14 63.2% #17 1,830 7 47
37 2025 13–14 48.1% #46 1,803 0 2 2017 38–15 71.7% #5 1,935 7 47
38 2026 8–12 40.0% #87 1,748 0 2 2018 15–11 57.7% #39 1,867 7 47
39 — — — — — — — 2019 20–15 57.1% #52 1,827 7 47
40 — — — — — — — 2020 1–8 11.1% #79 1,717 7 47
41 — — — — — — — 2021 3–9 25.0% #318 1,649 7 47
42 — — — — — — — 2022 0–4 0.0% #1000 1,603 7 47
43 — — — — — — — 2023 3–7 30.0% #412 1,594 7 47