H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 22:32 UTC
Madison Keys vs Barbora Strycova H2H: 3-1
Madison Keys holds a 3–1 lead over Barbora Strycova in their WTA head-to-head. Across 4 main-draw meetings, Madison Keys leads 2–0 on clay and 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Madison Keys won the 2016 Birmingham final 6-3 6-4.
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 31
Right-Handed
178 cm / 5'10"
H2H
3
–
1
4 main draw meetings
CZE
Age 40
Right-Handed
164 cm / 5'5"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 19, 2016* | Birmingham | WTA 250 | F | Grass | Madison Keys | 6-3 6-4 | Barbora Strycova | Match data |
| May 14, 2016* | Rome | WTA 1000 | QF | Clay | Madison Keys | 6-4 4-6 6-3 | Barbora Strycova | Match data |
| May 3, 2016* | Madrid | WTA 1000 | R32 | Clay | Madison Keys | 6-3 6-3 | Barbora Strycova | Match data |
| Sep 25, 2014* | Wuhan | WTA 1000 | R32 | Hard | Barbora Strycova | 3-6 6-2 6-2 | Madison Keys | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Madison Keys | #23 | #5 | 4,999 | 2,136 | 363 | 211 | 63.2% | 1 | 1 | 0 | 6 | 3 | 11 |
| Barbora Strycova | #430 | #16 | 2,295 | 1,888 | 286 | 297 | 49.1% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
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 | Madison Keys | Barbora Strycova | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 14 | 2009 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #616 | 1,512 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 16 | 2011 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #273 | 1,516 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 2012 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #137 | 1,514 | 0 | 0 | 2003 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #142 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2013 | 24–17 | 58.5% | #38 | 1,726 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 14–15 | 48.3% | #57 | 1,562 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2014 | 27–21 | 56.2% | #30 | 1,742 | 0 | 1 | 2005 | 8–15 | 34.8% | #137 | 1,490 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2015 | 31–19 | 62.0% | #18 | 1,802 | 0 | 1 | 2006 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #168 | 1,477 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2016 | 41–16 | 71.9% | #8 | 1,915 | 0 | 2 | 2007 | 2–5 | 28.6% | #151 | 1,456 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2017 | 17–10 | 63.0% | #19 | 1,892 | 0 | 3 | 2008 | 5–9 | 35.7% | #75 | 1,512 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2018 | 28–15 | 65.1% | #17 | 1,899 | 0 | 3 | 2009 | 13–20 | 39.4% | #66 | 1,524 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2019 | 27–13 | 67.5% | #13 | 1,910 | 0 | 5 | 2010 | 16–22 | 42.1% | #67 | 1,591 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2020 | 8–5 | 61.5% | #16 | 1,866 | 0 | 5 | 2011 | 24–26 | 48.0% | #44 | 1,631 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2021 | 11–15 | 42.3% | #56 | 1,731 | 0 | 5 | 2012 | 13–21 | 38.2% | #89 | 1,564 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2022 | 30–19 | 61.2% | #11 | 1,863 | 0 | 6 | 2013 | 5–6 | 45.5% | #94 | 1,584 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2023 | 29–17 | 63.0% | #12 | 1,879 | 0 | 7 | 2014 | 29–23 | 55.8% | #25 | 1,750 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 2024 | 25–12 | 67.6% | #21 | 1,950 | 0 | 8 | 2015 | 31–26 | 54.4% | #42 | 1,710 | 0 | 1 |
| 30 | 2025 | 37–15 | 71.2% | #7 | 1,964 | 1 | 10 | 2016 | 35–23 | 60.3% | #20 | 1,791 | 0 | 1 |
| 31 | 2026 | 25–10 | 71.4% | #23 | 2,020 | 1 | 11 | 2017 | 42–24 | 63.6% | #23 | 1,868 | 0 | 2 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2018 | 23–22 | 51.1% | #33 | 1,765 | 0 | 2 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2019 | 19–20 | 48.7% | #33 | 1,713 | 0 | 2 |
| 34 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2020 | 5–9 | 35.7% | #37 | 1,680 | 0 | 2 |
| 35 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2021 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #340 | 1,650 | 0 | 2 |
| 37 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2023 | 2–7 | 22.2% | #430 | 1,602 | 0 | 2 |