H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Mary Pierce vs Anna Smashnova H2H: 1-0
Mary Pierce holds a 1–0 lead over Anna Smashnova in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Mary Pierce leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Mary Pierce won the 2000 Hilton Head fourth round 6-1 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.
FRA
Age 51
Right-Handed
178 cm / 5'10"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
ISR
Age 50
Right-Handed
157 cm / 5'2"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 21, 2000* | Hilton Head | WTA 1000 | R16 | Clay | Mary Pierce | 6-1 6-2 | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mary Pierce | #560 | #3 | 3,797 | 2,137 | 460 | 215 | 68.1% | 2 | 5 | 0 | 3 | 8 | 18 |
| 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 | Mary Pierce | Anna Smashnova | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 14 | 1989 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #243 | 1,480 | 0 | 0 | 1991 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #264 | 1,492 | 0 | 0 |
| 15 | 1990 | 6–7 | 46.2% | #107 | 1,543 | 0 | 0 | 1992 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #236 | 1,489 | 0 | 0 |
| 16 | 1991 | 21–9 | 70.0% | #26 | 1,786 | 0 | 1 | 1993 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #139 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 1992 | 31–9 | 77.5% | #13 | 1,901 | 0 | 4 | 1994 | 10–11 | 47.6% | #47 | 1,599 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 1993 | 38–15 | 71.7% | #12 | 2,003 | 0 | 5 | 1995 | 8–12 | 40.0% | #68 | 1,574 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1994 | 43–16 | 72.9% | #5 | 2,053 | 0 | 5 | 1996 | 4–11 | 26.7% | #132 | 1,560 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1995 | 35–14 | 71.4% | #5 | 2,008 | 1 | 7 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 21 | 1996 | 17–11 | 60.7% | #24 | 1,899 | 1 | 7 | 1998 | 12–14 | 46.2% | #49 | 1,582 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1997 | 45–15 | 75.0% | #7 | 2,053 | 1 | 8 | 1999 | 21–23 | 47.7% | #47 | 1,637 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 1998 | 35–12 | 74.5% | #7 | 2,120 | 1 | 12 | 2000 | 25–23 | 52.1% | #46 | 1,668 | 0 | 2 |
| 24 | 1999 | 45–19 | 70.3% | #5 | 2,053 | 1 | 13 | 2001 | 13–19 | 40.6% | #88 | 1,605 | 0 | 2 |
| 25 | 2000 | 29–11 | 72.5% | #7 | 2,033 | 2 | 15 | 2002 | 43–25 | 63.2% | #16 | 1,793 | 0 | 6 |
| 26 | 2001 | 6–8 | 42.9% | #129 | 1,839 | 2 | 15 | 2003 | 37–21 | 63.8% | #16 | 1,857 | 0 | 8 |
| 27 | 2002 | 14–13 | 51.9% | #52 | 1,752 | 2 | 15 | 2004 | 28–23 | 54.9% | #32 | 1,732 | 0 | 9 |
| 28 | 2003 | 23–17 | 57.5% | #33 | 1,786 | 2 | 15 | 2005 | 24–16 | 60.0% | #43 | 1,745 | 0 | 11 |
| 29 | 2004 | 22–16 | 57.9% | #29 | 1,754 | 2 | 16 | 2006 | 16–16 | 50.0% | #63 | 1,700 | 0 | 12 |
| 30 | 2005 | 41–12 | 77.4% | #5 | 2,119 | 2 | 18 | 2007 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #921 | 1,648 | 0 | 12 |
| 31 | 2006 | 9–8 | 52.9% | #79 | 1,967 | 2 | 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |