H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Lesia Tsurenko vs Jelena Jankovic H2H: 1-1
Lesia Tsurenko and Jelena Jankovic are tied 1–1 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on hard courts. Most recently, Lesia Tsurenko won the 2016 Guangzhou final 6-4 3-6 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.
UKR
Age 37
Right-Handed
174 cm / 5'9"
H2H
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
SRB
Age 41
Right-Handed
177 cm / 5'10"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 24, 2016* | Guangzhou | WTA 250 | F | Hard | Lesia Tsurenko | 6-4 3-6 6-4 | Jelena Jankovic | Match data |
| Mar 14, 2015* | Indian Wells | WTA 1000 | QF | Hard | Jelena Jankovic | 6-1 4-1 (ret.) | 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 |
| Jelena Jankovic | #970 | #1 | 9,200 | 2,132 | 547 | 332 | 62.2% | 0 | 6 | 0 | 3 | 6 | 15 |
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 | Jelena Jankovic | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2001 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #364 | 1,512 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2002 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #196 | 1,528 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2003 | 4–9 | 30.8% | #85 | 1,505 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2004 | 27–25 | 51.9% | #28 | 1,754 | 0 | 1 |
| 20 | 2009 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #284 | 1,483 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 36–29 | 55.4% | #22 | 1,732 | 0 | 1 |
| 21 | 2010 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #155 | 1,468 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 45–28 | 61.6% | #12 | 1,915 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 2011 | 3–7 | 30.0% | #113 | 1,467 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 73–26 | 73.7% | #3 | 1,966 | 0 | 5 |
| 23 | 2012 | 7–12 | 36.8% | #116 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 63–18 | 77.8% | #1 | 2,087 | 0 | 9 |
| 24 | 2013 | 11–18 | 37.9% | #68 | 1,507 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 42–19 | 68.9% | #8 | 1,948 | 0 | 11 |
| 25 | 2014 | 4–8 | 33.3% | #92 | 1,511 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 35–22 | 61.4% | #8 | 1,794 | 0 | 12 |
| 26 | 2015 | 22–17 | 56.4% | #33 | 1,738 | 0 | 1 | 2011 | 38–22 | 63.3% | #14 | 1,804 | 0 | 12 |
| 27 | 2016 | 19–19 | 50.0% | #57 | 1,728 | 0 | 2 | 2012 | 31–27 | 53.4% | #22 | 1,737 | 0 | 12 |
| 28 | 2017 | 22–24 | 47.8% | #42 | 1,699 | 0 | 3 | 2013 | 46–21 | 68.7% | #8 | 1,918 | 0 | 13 |
| 29 | 2018 | 26–18 | 59.1% | #27 | 1,814 | 0 | 4 | 2014 | 38–22 | 63.3% | #15 | 1,795 | 0 | 13 |
| 30 | 2019 | 14–14 | 50.0% | #73 | 1,734 | 0 | 4 | 2015 | 39–21 | 65.0% | #21 | 1,851 | 0 | 15 |
| 31 | 2020 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #146 | 1,746 | 0 | 4 | 2016 | 21–19 | 52.5% | #54 | 1,738 | 0 | 15 |
| 32 | 2021 | 6–10 | 37.5% | #118 | 1,738 | 0 | 4 | 2017 | 6–19 | 24.0% | #158 | 1,576 | 0 | 15 |
| 33 | 2022 | 10–11 | 47.6% | #137 | 1,745 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 34 | 2023 | 24–15 | 61.5% | #31 | 1,866 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 35 | 2024 | 10–20 | 33.3% | #115 | 1,693 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |