H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Lesia Tsurenko vs Evgeniya Rodina H2H: 1-1
Lesia Tsurenko and Evgeniya Rodina are tied 1–1 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Evgeniya Rodina leads 1–0 on grass, while Lesia Tsurenko leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Lesia Tsurenko won the 2016 Tashkent third round 6-0 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.
UKR
Age 37
Right-Handed
174 cm / 5'9"
H2H
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
RUS
Age 37
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 28, 2016* | Tashkent | WTA 250 | R32 | Hard | Lesia Tsurenko | 6-0 6-2 | Evgeniya Rodina | Match data |
| Jun 29, 2016* | Wimbledon | Grand Slam | R128 | Grass | Evgeniya Rodina | 6-3 7-5 | Lesia Tsurenko | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lesia Tsurenko | #370 | #23 | 2,030 | 1,889 | 180 | 200 | 47.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 4 |
| Evgeniya Rodina | #1,376 | #67 | 882 | 1,663 | 74 | 119 | 38.3% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
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 | Lesia Tsurenko | Evgeniya Rodina | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2005 | 2–1 | 66.7% | #320 | 1,516 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2007 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #120 | 1,524 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2008 | 5–9 | 35.7% | #145 | 1,523 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2009 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #284 | 1,483 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #99 | 1,527 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2010 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #155 | 1,468 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 5–4 | 55.6% | #107 | 1,579 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2011 | 3–7 | 30.0% | #113 | 1,467 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 9–12 | 42.9% | #106 | 1,560 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2012 | 7–12 | 36.8% | #116 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #370 | 1,546 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2013 | 11–18 | 37.9% | #68 | 1,507 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #474 | 1,529 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2014 | 4–8 | 33.3% | #92 | 1,511 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 26 | 2015 | 22–17 | 56.4% | #33 | 1,738 | 0 | 1 | 2015 | 14–17 | 45.2% | #87 | 1,588 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2016 | 19–19 | 50.0% | #57 | 1,728 | 0 | 2 | 2016 | 8–13 | 38.1% | #86 | 1,650 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2017 | 22–24 | 47.8% | #42 | 1,699 | 0 | 3 | 2017 | 9–18 | 33.3% | #105 | 1,572 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2018 | 26–18 | 59.1% | #27 | 1,814 | 0 | 4 | 2018 | 9–11 | 45.0% | #71 | 1,570 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2019 | 14–14 | 50.0% | #73 | 1,734 | 0 | 4 | 2019 | 4–16 | 20.0% | #295 | 1,467 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | 2020 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #146 | 1,746 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 2021 | 6–10 | 37.5% | #118 | 1,738 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 2022 | 10–11 | 47.6% | #137 | 1,745 | 0 | 4 | 2022 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #438 | 1,512 | 0 | 0 |
| 34 | 2023 | 24–15 | 61.5% | #31 | 1,866 | 0 | 4 | 2023 | 3–8 | 27.3% | #443 | 1,504 | 0 | 0 |
| 35 | 2024 | 10–20 | 33.3% | #115 | 1,693 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |