H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 10:30 UTC
Lucie Safarova vs Eugenie Bouchard H2H: 1-1
Lucie Safarova and Eugenie Bouchard 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, Eugenie Bouchard won the 2016 Montreal second round 6-3 3-6 7-6(3).
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
CZE
Age 39
Left-Handed
177 cm / 5'10"
H2H
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
CAN
Age 32
Right-Handed
178 cm / 5'10"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 27, 2016* | Montreal | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard | Eugenie Bouchard | 6-3 3-6 7-6(3) | Lucie Safarova | Match data |
| Sep 14, 2013* | Quebec City | WTA 250 | SF | Hard | Lucie Safarova | 3-6 6-3 6-2 | 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 Safarova | #1,269 | #5 | 4,055 | 1,929 | 351 | 270 | 56.5% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 5 | 7 |
| 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 Safarova | 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 | 2005 | 15–9 | 62.5% | #47 | 1,665 | 0 | 2 | 2012 | 5–4 | 55.6% | #147 | 1,547 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2006 | 21–21 | 50.0% | #42 | 1,625 | 0 | 3 | 2013 | 25–17 | 59.5% | #32 | 1,752 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2007 | 28–16 | 63.6% | #23 | 1,778 | 0 | 3 | 2014 | 39–23 | 62.9% | #7 | 1,834 | 0 | 1 |
| 21 | 2008 | 15–19 | 44.1% | #63 | 1,640 | 0 | 4 | 2015 | 12–17 | 41.4% | #49 | 1,678 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 2009 | 32–23 | 58.2% | #41 | 1,768 | 0 | 4 | 2016 | 28–22 | 56.0% | #46 | 1,699 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 2010 | 27–23 | 54.0% | #33 | 1,722 | 0 | 4 | 2017 | 10–19 | 34.5% | #81 | 1,604 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 2011 | 34–23 | 59.6% | #25 | 1,797 | 0 | 4 | 2018 | 11–13 | 45.8% | #87 | 1,670 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 2012 | 27–22 | 55.1% | #17 | 1,771 | 0 | 4 | 2019 | 4–10 | 28.6% | #215 | 1,616 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2013 | 26–22 | 54.2% | #29 | 1,797 | 0 | 5 | 2020 | 10–4 | 71.4% | #141 | 1,712 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2014 | 36–23 | 61.0% | #16 | 1,858 | 0 | 5 | 2021 | 4–3 | 57.1% | #253 | 1,703 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2015 | 31–21 | 59.6% | #9 | 1,829 | 0 | 6 | 2022 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #326 | 1,630 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 2016 | 14–18 | 43.8% | #62 | 1,696 | 0 | 7 | 2023 | 3–3 | 50.0% | #287 | 1,635 | 0 | 1 |
| 30 | 2017 | 35–19 | 64.8% | #30 | 1,791 | 0 | 7 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 2018 | 10–11 | 47.6% | #105 | 1,754 | 0 | 7 | 2025 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #1002 | 1,609 | 0 | 1 |