H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Lesia Tsurenko vs Mihaela Buzarnescu H2H: 1-2
Mihaela Buzarnescu holds a 2–1 lead over Lesia Tsurenko in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Mihaela Buzarnescu leads 2–1 on hard courts. Most recently, Lesia Tsurenko won the 2019 Brisbane 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
–
2
3 main draw meetings
ROU
Age 38
Left-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 31, 2018 | Brisbane | WTA 500 | R32 | Hard | Lesia Tsurenko | 6-0 6-2 | Mihaela Buzarnescu | Match data |
| Feb 14, 2018* | Doha | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard | Mihaela Buzarnescu | 7-5 6-4 | Lesia Tsurenko | Match data |
| Jan 12, 2018* | Hobart | WTA 250 | SF | Hard | Mihaela Buzarnescu | 6-2 6-2 | 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 |
| Mihaela Buzarnescu | #798 | #20 | 2,068 | 1,872 | 58 | 63 | 47.9% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
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 | Mihaela Buzarnescu | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 20 | 2009 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #284 | 1,483 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 21 | 2010 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #155 | 1,468 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 22 | 2011 | 3–7 | 30.0% | #113 | 1,467 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 23 | 2012 | 7–12 | 36.8% | #116 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 24 | 2013 | 11–18 | 37.9% | #68 | 1,507 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 25 | 2014 | 4–8 | 33.3% | #92 | 1,511 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 26 | 2015 | 22–17 | 56.4% | #33 | 1,738 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 27 | 2016 | 19–19 | 50.0% | #57 | 1,728 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 2017 | 22–24 | 47.8% | #42 | 1,699 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 2018 | 26–18 | 59.1% | #27 | 1,814 | 0 | 4 | 2017 | 3–3 | 50.0% | #60 | 1,573 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2019 | 14–14 | 50.0% | #73 | 1,734 | 0 | 4 | 2018 | 34–21 | 61.8% | #24 | 1,798 | 0 | 1 |
| 31 | 2020 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #146 | 1,746 | 0 | 4 | 2019 | 13–23 | 36.1% | #113 | 1,634 | 0 | 1 |
| 32 | 2021 | 6–10 | 37.5% | #118 | 1,738 | 0 | 4 | 2020 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #137 | 1,619 | 0 | 1 |
| 33 | 2022 | 10–11 | 47.6% | #137 | 1,745 | 0 | 4 | 2021 | 6–11 | 35.3% | #122 | 1,631 | 0 | 1 |
| 34 | 2023 | 24–15 | 61.5% | #31 | 1,866 | 0 | 4 | 2022 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #404 | 1,615 | 0 | 1 |
| 35 | 2024 | 10–20 | 33.3% | #115 | 1,693 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 37 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2025 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,538 | 0 | 1 |