H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Meghann Shaughnessy vs Anastasiya Yakimova H2H: 0-1
Anastasiya Yakimova holds a 1–0 lead over Meghann Shaughnessy in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Anastasiya Yakimova leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Anastasiya Yakimova won the 2006 Istanbul fourth round 2-6 6-3 6-0.
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 47
Right-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
BLR
Age 39
Right-Handed
165 cm / 5'5"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 26, 2006* | Istanbul | WTA 500 | R16 | Clay | Anastasiya Yakimova | 2-6 6-3 6-0 | Meghann Shaughnessy | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Meghann Shaughnessy | #1,104 | #11 | 1,949 | 1,888 | 233 | 233 | 50.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 6 |
| Anastasiya Yakimova | #1,233 | #49 | 989 | 1,526 | 30 | 74 | 28.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
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 | Meghann Shaughnessy | Anastasiya Yakimova | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 1996 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #165 | 1,512 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #143 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 1997 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #198 | 1,499 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 0–8 | 0.0% | #117 | 1,409 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1998 | 8–9 | 47.1% | #69 | 1,544 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 8–12 | 40.0% | #67 | 1,465 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1999 | 10–22 | 31.2% | #99 | 1,439 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 5–10 | 33.3% | #129 | 1,452 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2000 | 23–20 | 53.5% | #38 | 1,652 | 0 | 1 | 2008 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #103 | 1,437 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2001 | 45–25 | 64.3% | #12 | 1,825 | 0 | 2 | 2009 | 6–12 | 33.3% | #109 | 1,488 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2002 | 29–27 | 51.8% | #30 | 1,716 | 0 | 2 | 2010 | 2–5 | 28.6% | #120 | 1,479 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2003 | 32–23 | 58.2% | #17 | 1,725 | 0 | 3 | 2011 | 6–13 | 31.6% | #62 | 1,469 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2004 | 20–22 | 47.6% | #40 | 1,663 | 0 | 3 | 2012 | 1–9 | 10.0% | #256 | 1,432 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2005 | 17–25 | 40.5% | #66 | 1,563 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 27 | 2006 | 27–20 | 57.4% | #37 | 1,709 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 2007 | 18–22 | 45.0% | #52 | 1,666 | 0 | 6 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 2008 | 0–5 | 0.0% | #836 | 1,579 | 0 | 6 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 2009 | 1–8 | 11.1% | #590 | 1,533 | 0 | 6 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |