H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Lindsay Davenport vs Anna Smashnova H2H: 3-0
Lindsay Davenport holds a 3–0 lead over Anna Smashnova in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Lindsay Davenport leads 2–0 on hard courts and 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Lindsay Davenport won the 2002 Filderstadt fourth round 6-4 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.
USA
Age 50
Right-Handed
189 cm / 6'2"
H2H
3
–
0
3 main draw meetings
ISR
Age 50
Right-Handed
157 cm / 5'2"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 11, 2002* | Filderstadt | WTA 500 | R16 | Hard | Lindsay Davenport | 6-4 6-3 | Anna Smashnova | Match data |
| Sep 24, 1999* | Tokyo | WTA 500 | R16 | Hard | Lindsay Davenport | 6-0 6-1 | Anna Smashnova | Match data |
| May 23, 1999* | Madrid | WTA 1000 | QF | Clay | Lindsay Davenport | 6-1 6-3 | Anna Smashnova | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lindsay Davenport | #35 | #1 | 6,100 | 2,353 | 704 | 190 | 78.7% | 3 | 13 | 1 | 25 | 12 | 54 |
| Anna Smashnova | #994 | #15 | 1,616 | 1,882 | 242 | 221 | 52.3% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 12 | 12 |
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 | Lindsay Davenport | Anna Smashnova | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 14 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1991 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #264 | 1,492 | 0 | 0 |
| 15 | 1991 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #348 | 1,504 | 0 | 0 | 1992 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #236 | 1,489 | 0 | 0 |
| 16 | 1992 | 2–5 | 28.6% | #161 | 1,511 | 0 | 0 | 1993 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #139 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 1993 | 31–15 | 67.4% | #20 | 1,858 | 0 | 1 | 1994 | 10–11 | 47.6% | #47 | 1,599 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 1994 | 44–15 | 74.6% | #6 | 2,022 | 0 | 3 | 1995 | 8–12 | 40.0% | #68 | 1,574 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1995 | 31–14 | 68.9% | #12 | 1,933 | 0 | 4 | 1996 | 4–11 | 26.7% | #132 | 1,560 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1996 | 41–15 | 73.2% | #9 | 2,013 | 0 | 6 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 21 | 1997 | 57–16 | 78.1% | #3 | 2,161 | 0 | 12 | 1998 | 12–14 | 46.2% | #49 | 1,582 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1998 | 68–14 | 82.9% | #1 | 2,283 | 1 | 18 | 1999 | 21–23 | 47.7% | #47 | 1,637 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 1999 | 58–11 | 84.1% | #2 | 2,297 | 2 | 25 | 2000 | 25–23 | 52.1% | #46 | 1,668 | 0 | 2 |
| 24 | 2000 | 56–13 | 81.2% | #2 | 2,228 | 3 | 29 | 2001 | 13–19 | 40.6% | #88 | 1,605 | 0 | 2 |
| 25 | 2001 | 64–10 | 86.5% | #1 | 2,275 | 3 | 36 | 2002 | 43–25 | 63.2% | #16 | 1,793 | 0 | 6 |
| 26 | 2002 | 24–9 | 72.7% | #12 | 2,153 | 3 | 36 | 2003 | 37–21 | 63.8% | #16 | 1,857 | 0 | 8 |
| 27 | 2003 | 48–15 | 76.2% | #5 | 2,076 | 3 | 37 | 2004 | 28–23 | 54.9% | #32 | 1,732 | 0 | 9 |
| 28 | 2004 | 64–10 | 86.5% | #1 | 2,203 | 3 | 44 | 2005 | 24–16 | 60.0% | #43 | 1,745 | 0 | 11 |
| 29 | 2005 | 58–11 | 84.1% | #1 | 2,199 | 3 | 50 | 2006 | 16–16 | 50.0% | #63 | 1,700 | 0 | 12 |
| 30 | 2006 | 21–8 | 72.4% | #25 | 2,122 | 3 | 50 | 2007 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #921 | 1,648 | 0 | 12 |
| 31 | 2007 | 13–1 | 92.9% | #72 | 2,147 | 3 | 52 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 2008 | 23–6 | 79.3% | #35 | 2,063 | 3 | 54 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |