H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 16:32 UTC
Lesia Tsurenko vs Madison Brengle H2H: 0-1
Madison Brengle holds a 1–0 lead over Lesia Tsurenko in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Madison Brengle leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Madison Brengle won the 2015 Brisbane third round 7-6(6) 6-3.
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
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
USA
Age 36
Right-Handed
168 cm / 5'6"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 8, 2015* | Brisbane | WTA 500 | R32 | Hard | Madison Brengle | 7-6(6) 6-3 | 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 |
| Madison Brengle | #210 | #35 | 1,324 | 1,740 | 94 | 151 | 38.4% | 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 | Madison Brengle | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2007 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #229 | 1,502 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2008 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #220 | 1,457 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2009 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #165 | 1,456 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2009 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #284 | 1,483 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #188 | 1,447 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2010 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #155 | 1,468 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #197 | 1,459 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2011 | 3–7 | 30.0% | #113 | 1,467 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #191 | 1,444 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2012 | 7–12 | 36.8% | #116 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 24 | 2013 | 11–18 | 37.9% | #68 | 1,507 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 4–4 | 50.0% | #95 | 1,503 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2014 | 4–8 | 33.3% | #92 | 1,511 | 0 | 0 | 2015 | 25–26 | 49.0% | #40 | 1,627 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2015 | 22–17 | 56.4% | #33 | 1,738 | 0 | 1 | 2016 | 16–22 | 42.1% | #73 | 1,602 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2016 | 19–19 | 50.0% | #57 | 1,728 | 0 | 2 | 2017 | 10–18 | 35.7% | #83 | 1,656 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2017 | 22–24 | 47.8% | #42 | 1,699 | 0 | 3 | 2018 | 3–11 | 21.4% | #88 | 1,606 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2018 | 26–18 | 59.1% | #27 | 1,814 | 0 | 4 | 2019 | 7–11 | 38.9% | #95 | 1,601 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2019 | 14–14 | 50.0% | #73 | 1,734 | 0 | 4 | 2020 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #82 | 1,641 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | 2020 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #146 | 1,746 | 0 | 4 | 2021 | 6–14 | 30.0% | #59 | 1,645 | 0 | 0 |
| 32 | 2021 | 6–10 | 37.5% | #118 | 1,738 | 0 | 4 | 2022 | 12–16 | 42.9% | #57 | 1,637 | 0 | 0 |
| 33 | 2022 | 10–11 | 47.6% | #137 | 1,745 | 0 | 4 | 2023 | 6–14 | 30.0% | #151 | 1,586 | 0 | 0 |
| 34 | 2023 | 24–15 | 61.5% | #31 | 1,866 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 35 | 2024 | 10–20 | 33.3% | #115 | 1,693 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |