H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Meghann Shaughnessy vs Iva Majoli H2H: 3-1
Meghann Shaughnessy holds a 3–1 lead over Iva Majoli in their WTA head-to-head. Across 4 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on clay, while Meghann Shaughnessy leads 1–0 on carpet. Most recently, Meghann Shaughnessy won the 2003 Berlin second round 7-6(3) 3-6 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 47
Right-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H
3
–
1
4 main draw meetings
CRO
Age 48
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 7, 2003* | Berlin | WTA 1000 | R64 | Clay | Meghann Shaughnessy | 7-6(3) 3-6 6-4 | Iva Majoli | Match data |
| Sep 23, 2001* | Quebec City | WTA 250 | F | Carpet | Meghann Shaughnessy | 6-1 6-3 | Iva Majoli | Match data |
| Jun 27, 2001* | Wimbledon | Grand Slam | R128 | Grass | Meghann Shaughnessy | 7-6(4) 6-3 | Iva Majoli | Match data |
| Apr 19, 2000* | Hilton Head | WTA 1000 | R64 | Clay | Iva Majoli | 1-6 7-6(3) 7-5 | 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 |
| Iva Majoli | #777 | #4 | 3,406 | 2,157 | 259 | 190 | 57.7% | 1 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 8 |
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 | Iva Majoli | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 14 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1992 | 7–6 | 53.8% | #50 | 1,624 | 0 | 0 |
| 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1993 | 13–13 | 50.0% | #46 | 1,736 | 0 | 0 |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1994 | 38–19 | 66.7% | #13 | 1,922 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 1996 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #165 | 1,512 | 0 | 0 | 1995 | 29–12 | 70.7% | #9 | 2,046 | 0 | 2 |
| 18 | 1997 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #198 | 1,499 | 0 | 0 | 1996 | 39–16 | 70.9% | #8 | 2,040 | 0 | 4 |
| 19 | 1998 | 8–9 | 47.1% | #69 | 1,544 | 0 | 0 | 1997 | 43–21 | 67.2% | #6 | 1,947 | 1 | 7 |
| 20 | 1999 | 10–22 | 31.2% | #99 | 1,439 | 0 | 0 | 1998 | 23–20 | 53.5% | #25 | 1,828 | 1 | 7 |
| 21 | 2000 | 23–20 | 53.5% | #38 | 1,652 | 0 | 1 | 1999 | 5–11 | 31.2% | #164 | 1,694 | 1 | 7 |
| 22 | 2001 | 45–25 | 64.3% | #12 | 1,825 | 0 | 2 | 2000 | 11–10 | 52.4% | #62 | 1,703 | 1 | 7 |
| 23 | 2002 | 29–27 | 51.8% | #30 | 1,716 | 0 | 2 | 2001 | 20–22 | 47.6% | #44 | 1,697 | 1 | 7 |
| 24 | 2003 | 32–23 | 58.2% | #17 | 1,725 | 0 | 3 | 2002 | 23–22 | 51.1% | #32 | 1,668 | 1 | 8 |
| 25 | 2004 | 20–22 | 47.6% | #40 | 1,663 | 0 | 3 | 2003 | 7–15 | 31.8% | #131 | 1,589 | 1 | 8 |
| 26 | 2005 | 17–25 | 40.5% | #66 | 1,563 | 0 | 3 | 2004 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #321 | 1,564 | 1 | 8 |
| 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 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |