H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Lucie Safarova vs Tamira Paszek H2H: 2-1
Lucie Safarova holds a 2–1 lead over Tamira Paszek in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on hard courts, while Lucie Safarova leads 1–0 on carpet. Most recently, Lucie Safarova won the 2012 Indian Wells second round 6-3 3-1 RET.
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
2
–
1
3 main draw meetings
Age 35
Right-Handed
165 cm / 5'5"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 7, 2012* | Indian Wells | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard | Lucie Safarova | 6-3 3-1 (ret.) | Tamira Paszek | Match data |
| Sep 1, 2010* | US Open | Grand Slam | R128 | Hard | Tamira Paszek | 2-6 7-5 6-2 | Lucie Safarova | Match data |
| Feb 11, 2010* | Paris | WTA 500 | R32 | Carpet | Lucie Safarova | 6-0 6-3 | Tamira Paszek | 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 |
| Tamira Paszek | — | — | — | 1,801 | 99 | 128 | 43.6% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
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 | Tamira Paszek | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 14 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2005 | 1–1 | 50.0% | — | 1,512 | 0 | 0 |
| 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2006 | 6–2 | 75.0% | — | 1,598 | 0 | 1 |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2007 | 15–14 | 51.7% | — | 1,730 | 0 | 1 |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2008 | 16–18 | 47.1% | — | 1,697 | 0 | 1 |
| 18 | 2005 | 15–9 | 62.5% | #47 | 1,665 | 0 | 2 | 2009 | 5–9 | 35.7% | — | 1,626 | 0 | 1 |
| 19 | 2006 | 21–21 | 50.0% | #42 | 1,625 | 0 | 3 | 2010 | 9–9 | 50.0% | — | 1,641 | 0 | 2 |
| 20 | 2007 | 28–16 | 63.6% | #23 | 1,778 | 0 | 3 | 2011 | 19–21 | 47.5% | — | 1,664 | 0 | 2 |
| 21 | 2008 | 15–19 | 44.1% | #63 | 1,640 | 0 | 4 | 2012 | 18–20 | 47.4% | — | 1,687 | 0 | 3 |
| 22 | 2009 | 32–23 | 58.2% | #41 | 1,768 | 0 | 4 | 2013 | 2–17 | 10.5% | — | 1,483 | 0 | 3 |
| 23 | 2010 | 27–23 | 54.0% | #33 | 1,722 | 0 | 4 | 2014 | 1–4 | 20.0% | — | 1,475 | 0 | 3 |
| 24 | 2011 | 34–23 | 59.6% | #25 | 1,797 | 0 | 4 | 2015 | 1–4 | 20.0% | — | 1,447 | 0 | 3 |
| 25 | 2012 | 27–22 | 55.1% | #17 | 1,771 | 0 | 4 | 2016 | 6–9 | 40.0% | — | 1,498 | 0 | 3 |
| 26 | 2013 | 26–22 | 54.2% | #29 | 1,797 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 27 | 2014 | 36–23 | 61.0% | #16 | 1,858 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 2015 | 31–21 | 59.6% | #9 | 1,829 | 0 | 6 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 2016 | 14–18 | 43.8% | #62 | 1,696 | 0 | 7 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 2017 | 35–19 | 64.8% | #30 | 1,791 | 0 | 7 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 2018 | 10–11 | 47.6% | #105 | 1,754 | 0 | 7 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |