H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 04:30 UTC
Lucie Hradecka vs Eugenie Bouchard H2H: 2-1
Lucie Hradecka holds a 2–1 lead over Eugenie Bouchard in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Lucie Hradecka leads 2–1 on hard courts. Most recently, Lucie Hradecka won the 2016 Miami first round 6-4 3-6 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.
CZE
Age 41
Right-Handed
177 cm / 5'10"
H2H
2
–
1
3 main draw meetings
CAN
Age 32
Right-Handed
178 cm / 5'10"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 22, 2016* | Miami | WTA 1000 | R128 | Hard | Lucie Hradecka | 6-4 3-6 6-2 | Eugenie Bouchard | Match data |
| Mar 11, 2015* | Indian Wells | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard | Eugenie Bouchard | 6-2 6-2 | Lucie Hradecka | Match data |
| Sep 14, 2012* | Quebec City | WTA 250 | R16 | Hard | Lucie Hradecka | 7-6(2) 2-6 7-6(4) | Eugenie Bouchard | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lucie Hradecka | #1,142 | #41 | 1,271 | 1,726 | 92 | 120 | 43.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Eugenie Bouchard | #1,002 | #5 | 4,793 | 1,926 | 156 | 144 | 52.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 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 | Lucie Hradecka | Eugenie Bouchard | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2011 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #305 | 1,492 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2012 | 5–4 | 55.6% | #147 | 1,547 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2013 | 25–17 | 59.5% | #32 | 1,752 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2014 | 39–23 | 62.9% | #7 | 1,834 | 0 | 1 |
| 21 | 2006 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #220 | 1,491 | 0 | 0 | 2015 | 12–17 | 41.4% | #49 | 1,678 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 2007 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #223 | 1,476 | 0 | 0 | 2016 | 28–22 | 56.0% | #46 | 1,699 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 2008 | 4–3 | 57.1% | #118 | 1,522 | 0 | 0 | 2017 | 10–19 | 34.5% | #81 | 1,604 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 2009 | 14–11 | 56.0% | #64 | 1,599 | 0 | 0 | 2018 | 11–13 | 45.8% | #87 | 1,670 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 2010 | 5–17 | 22.7% | #110 | 1,498 | 0 | 0 | 2019 | 4–10 | 28.6% | #215 | 1,616 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2011 | 16–20 | 44.4% | #52 | 1,580 | 0 | 0 | 2020 | 10–4 | 71.4% | #141 | 1,712 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2012 | 18–17 | 51.4% | #46 | 1,653 | 0 | 0 | 2021 | 4–3 | 57.1% | #253 | 1,703 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2013 | 5–11 | 31.2% | #148 | 1,562 | 0 | 0 | 2022 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #326 | 1,630 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 2014 | 3–3 | 50.0% | #154 | 1,587 | 0 | 0 | 2023 | 3–3 | 50.0% | #287 | 1,635 | 0 | 1 |
| 30 | 2015 | 17–17 | 50.0% | #53 | 1,641 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 2016 | 5–13 | 27.8% | #166 | 1,586 | 0 | 0 | 2025 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #1002 | 1,609 | 0 | 1 |
| 32 | 2017 | 4–3 | 57.1% | #193 | 1,621 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 34 | 2019 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #302 | 1,615 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 36 | 2021 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #567 | 1,549 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |