Melinda Czink
all rivalries →| Opponent | W | L | M | Last Played | H2H |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tathiana Garbin | 2 | 3 | 5 | Jan 13, 2009 | H2H |
| Sabine Lisicki | 1 | 3 | 4 | Feb 22, 2013 | H2H |
| Ana Ivanovic | 1 | 3 | 4 | Jan 16, 2013 | H2H |
| Vania King | 3 | 1 | 4 | Jan 5, 2012 | H2H |
| Alona Bondarenko | 2 | 2 | 4 | Jan 7, 2009 | H2H |
H2H data updated: 2026-09-14 00:00 UTC
Melinda Czink vs Sybille Bammer H2H: 1-1
Melinda Czink and Sybille Bammer are tied 1–1 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Melinda Czink leads 1–0 on clay, while Sybille Bammer leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Melinda Czink won the 2009 Roland Garros second round 4-6 6-3 10-8.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
H2H
1
–
1
2 main-draw meetings
H2H Match Log
| Player | Score | Player | Match Data | Date | Round | Tournament | Category | Surface |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Melinda Czink | 4-6 6-3 10-8 | Sybille Bammer | Match data | May 28, 2009* | R64 | Roland Garros | Grand Slam | Clay |
| Sybille Bammer | 6-4 6-3 | Melinda Czink | Match data | Feb 11, 2006* | QF | Pattaya | Tier IV → modern equivalent WTA 250 | Hard |
Estimated match date where the exact historical date is unavailable. Arrows show an edition's recorded category and documented modern equivalent; unresolved editions keep their recorded category. Asterisked totals include editions mapped from documented historical predecessor categories. Mapping details.
Career Comparison
| Player | Current | Peak | Pts | Elo | W | L | Win % | GS | 1000 including documented historical predecessor categories | Finals | 500 including documented historical predecessor categories | 250 including documented historical predecessor categories | Titles |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Melinda Czink | #691 | #37 | 1,571 | 1,796 | 89 | 137 | 39.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Sybille Bammer | #161 | #19 | 2,014 | 1,846 | 133 | 140 | 48.7% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 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 | Melinda Czink | Sybille Bammer | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 20 | 2003 | 4–3 | 57.1% | #79 | 1,568 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #294 | 1,487 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2004 | 2–16 | 11.1% | #128 | 1,427 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 22 | 2005 | 9–12 | 42.9% | #96 | 1,478 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 23 | 2006 | 14–18 | 43.8% | #105 | 1,500 | 0 | 0 | 2003 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #148 | 1,474 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2007 | 3–9 | 25.0% | #124 | 1,456 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #175 | 1,441 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2008 | 10–11 | 47.6% | #106 | 1,558 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 5–7 | 41.7% | #77 | 1,491 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2009 | 29–21 | 58.0% | #37 | 1,758 | 0 | 1 | 2006 | 19–26 | 42.2% | #49 | 1,567 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2010 | 3–16 | 15.8% | #312 | 1,533 | 0 | 1 | 2007 | 43–24 | 64.2% | #19 | 1,781 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2011 | 3–6 | 33.3% | #143 | 1,525 | 0 | 1 | 2008 | 27–25 | 51.9% | #26 | 1,717 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 2012 | 9–16 | 36.0% | #94 | 1,543 | 0 | 1 | 2009 | 21–23 | 47.7% | #54 | 1,671 | 0 | 2 |
| 30 | 2013 | 3–9 | 25.0% | #254 | 1,500 | 0 | 1 | 2010 | 15–19 | 44.1% | #68 | 1,648 | 0 | 2 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2011 | 3–9 | 25.0% | #161 | 1,570 | 0 | 2 |
Surface Results by Age
Seasons are aligned by the age each player spent most of that calendar year. Results cover completed main-draw matches. Bold green marks the higher win percentage when both players have at least 5 matches on that surface at the aligned age.
| Age | Melinda Czink | Sybille Bammer | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | Hard | Clay | Grass | Yr | Hard | Clay | Grass | |||||||||||||||||||
| W | L | M | Win % | W | L | M | Win % | W | L | M | Win % | W | L | M | Win % | W | L | M | Win % | W | L | M | Win % | |||
| 20 | 2003 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 50.0% | 2 | 1 | 3 | 66.7% | — | — | — | — | 2000 | — | — | — | — | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0.0% | — | — | — | — |
| 21 | 2004 | 1 | 7 | 8 | 12.5% | 1 | 7 | 8 | 12.5% | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0.0% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 22 | 2005 | 9 | 6 | 15 | 60.0% | 0 | 5 | 5 | 0.0% | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0.0% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 23 | 2006 | 9 | 12 | 21 | 42.9% | 4 | 4 | 8 | 50.0% | 1 | 2 | 3 | 33.3% | 2003 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0.0% | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0.0% | — | — | — | — |
| 24 | 2007 | 2 | 4 | 6 | 33.3% | 1 | 4 | 5 | 20.0% | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0.0% | 2004 | 0 | 4 | 4 | 0.0% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 25 | 2008 | 6 | 8 | 14 | 42.9% | 2 | 2 | 4 | 50.0% | 2 | 1 | 3 | 66.7% | 2005 | 5 | 6 | 11 | 45.5% | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0.0% | — | — | — | — |
| 26 | 2009 | 17 | 13 | 30 | 56.7% | 9 | 6 | 15 | 60.0% | 3 | 2 | 5 | 60.0% | 2006 | 14 | 20 | 34 | 41.2% | 3 | 5 | 8 | 37.5% | 2 | 1 | 3 | 66.7% |
| 27 | 2010 | 3 | 7 | 10 | 30.0% | 0 | 6 | 6 | 0.0% | 0 | 3 | 3 | 0.0% | 2007 | 29 | 16 | 45 | 64.4% | 11 | 6 | 17 | 64.7% | 3 | 2 | 5 | 60.0% |
| 28 | 2011 | 1 | 4 | 5 | 20.0% | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0.0% | 2 | 1 | 3 | 66.7% | 2008 | 22 | 18 | 40 | 55.0% | 3 | 4 | 7 | 42.9% | 2 | 3 | 5 | 40.0% |
| 29 | 2012 | 3 | 9 | 12 | 25.0% | 3 | 5 | 8 | 37.5% | 3 | 2 | 5 | 60.0% | 2009 | 11 | 15 | 26 | 42.3% | 9 | 6 | 15 | 60.0% | 1 | 2 | 3 | 33.3% |
| 30 | 2013 | 3 | 5 | 8 | 37.5% | 0 | 3 | 3 | 0.0% | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0.0% | 2010 | 11 | 12 | 23 | 47.8% | 3 | 5 | 8 | 37.5% | 1 | 2 | 3 | 33.3% |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2011 | 2 | 5 | 7 | 28.6% | 1 | 3 | 4 | 25.0% | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0.0% |
| Career | — | 56 | 77 | 133 | 42.1% | 22 | 44 | 66 | 33.3% | 11 | 16 | 27 | 40.7% | — | 94 | 97 | 191 | 49.2% | 30 | 32 | 62 | 48.4% | 9 | 11 | 20 | 45.0% |
Performance Progression by Age
Seasons are aligned by the age each player spent most of that calendar year. Detailed serve and return statistics available for 143/226 of Melinda Czink's and 198/266 of Sybille Bammer's main draw matches. Sample is shown as matches with detailed serve and return statistics / total main draw matches. Bold green marks the stronger value when both stat samples contain at least 5 matches; lower is better for DFs/M.
| Age | Melinda Czink | Sybille Bammer | ||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | Sample | Aces/M | DFs/M | 1st Sv% | 1st Pts% | 2nd Pts% | BP Saved% | BP Conv% | Svc Pts% | Ret Pts% | Yr | Sample | Aces/M | DFs/M | 1st Sv% | 1st Pts% | 2nd Pts% | BP Saved% | BP Conv% | Svc Pts% | Ret Pts% | |
| 20 | 2003 | 3/7 | 1.0 | 1.7 | 65.3% | 58.7% | 40.7% | 45.8% | 31.9% | 52.1% | 41.9% | — | —/— | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 21 | 2004 | 4/18 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 70.2% | 54.4% | 42.8% | 39.0% | 56.8% | 50.8% | 44.0% | — | —/— | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 22 | 2005 | 1/21 | 1.0 | 4.0 | 71.4% | 54.3% | 28.6% | 50.0% | 100.0% | 46.9% | 29.6% | — | —/— | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 23 | 2006 | 6/32 | 2.0 | 3.3 | 71.5% | 59.4% | 46.2% | 60.2% | 50.6% | 55.2% | 42.5% | — | —/— | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 24 | 2007 | 4/12 | 1.0 | 4.5 | 62.6% | 62.1% | 45.1% | 40.4% | 36.1% | 55.8% | 36.3% | — | —/— | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 25 | 2008 | 16/21 | 2.8 | 5.2 | 62.8% | 66.0% | 42.4% | 50.4% | 55.5% | 57.1% | 39.5% | 2005 | 1/12 | 2.0 | 5.0 | 56.3% | 52.4% | 44.9% | 46.2% | 35.3% | 49.1% | 46.3% |
| 26 | 2009 | 44/50 | 3.5 | 5.5 | 61.7% | 64.9% | 47.8% | 49.9% | 51.8% | 58.1% | 42.7% | 2006 | 22/45 | 0.8 | 2.6 | 66.6% | 57.9% | 46.9% | 47.3% | 52.4% | 53.5% | 39.8% |
| 27 | 2010 | 19/19 | 2.8 | 6.3 | 61.0% | 61.3% | 39.9% | 46.1% | 28.6% | 52.9% | 38.0% | 2007 | 56/67 | 1.3 | 2.5 | 66.4% | 63.7% | 52.1% | 57.0% | 52.8% | 60.1% | 47.2% |
| 28 | 2011 | 9/9 | 2.3 | 6.8 | 61.8% | 61.7% | 47.4% | 43.6% | 45.3% | 56.0% | 40.8% | 2008 | 37/52 | 1.3 | 3.0 | 66.9% | 57.4% | 47.7% | 51.5% | 47.9% | 53.8% | 45.0% |
| 29 | 2012 | 25/25 | 2.7 | 4.2 | 59.6% | 64.5% | 48.9% | 53.6% | 46.3% | 58.1% | 39.5% | 2009 | 39/44 | 1.1 | 3.8 | 68.8% | 58.1% | 45.5% | 54.4% | 46.5% | 54.3% | 44.1% |
| 30 | 2013 | 12/12 | 3.3 | 4.7 | 62.4% | 63.3% | 40.1% | 50.6% | 43.7% | 54.8% | 36.9% | 2010 | 31/34 | 1.2 | 4.1 | 68.9% | 58.1% | 42.5% | 49.1% | 51.1% | 53.7% | 43.5% |
| 31 | — | —/— | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2011 | 12/12 | 0.7 | 3.7 | 64.1% | 53.4% | 42.9% | 45.9% | 45.2% | 49.6% | 41.0% |
| Career | — | 143/226 | 2.8 | 5.0 | 62.2% | 63.3% | 45.1% | 49.5% | 46.6% | 56.3% | 40.3% | — | 198/273 | 1.1 | 3.2 | 67.2% | 59.2% | 47.3% | 52.4% | 49.8% | 55.3% | 44.4% |
Advanced Statistics Comparison by Age
Seasons are aligned by the age each player spent most of that calendar year. Metrics use eligible main-draw results; point statistics use matches with detailed data. Bold green marks the stronger value when both underlying samples are sufficient. Lower is better for Schedule because a negative value means a tougher schedule. Career Schedule is normalized per 100 matches.
| Age | Melinda Czink | Sybille Bammer | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | Elo | P+ | Serve+ | Return+ | PD | TPW% | Hard Elo | Clay Elo | Grass Elo | Set Win % | Set Margin | Dec. Set | Tiebreak | Pressure+ | Schedule | Yr | Elo | P+ | Serve+ | Return+ | PD | TPW% | Hard Elo | Clay Elo | Grass Elo | Set Win % | Set Margin | Dec. Set | Tiebreak | Pressure+ | Schedule | |
| 20 | 2003 | 1568 | 119.7 | -0.23 | +0.05 | 0.875 | 46.6% | +6 | -6 | — | 44.4% | -0.50 | 4–0 (100%) | 1–0 | — | -0.33 | 2000 | 1487 | 99.8 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 33.3% | -2.33 | 0–1 | 1–0 | — | +0.01 |
| 21 | 2004 | 1428 | 98.7 | -0.95 | -0.17 | 0.894 | 47.4% | +79 | +17 | — | 21.4% | -2.07 | 1–5 (17%) | 1–2 (33%) | — | -0.23 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 22 | 2005 | 1478 | 105.8 | -1.18 | -2.27 | 0.558 | 37.9% | +88 | -105 | — | 41.7% | -0.67 | 4–2 (67%) | 4–2 (67%) | 104.2 | +0.54 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 23 | 2006 | 1501 | 112.0 | -1.09 | -1.39 | 0.950 | 49.1% | +30 | -48 | +15 | 45.9% | -0.36 | 6–6 (50%) | 4–3 (57%) | 99.4 | +1.02 | 2003 | 1474 | 103.1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 20.0% | -1.80 | 0–1 | — | — | -0.17 |
| 24 | 2007 | 1457 | 101.5 | -0.83 | -2.90 | 0.821 | 45.7% | +57 | -51 | — | 31.0% | -1.10 | 2–3 (40%) | 1–4 (20%) | 96.9 | +0.11 | 2004 | 1441 | 105.9 | — | — | — | — | +35 | — | — | 20.0% | -1.50 | 0–2 | 0–1 | — | +0.03 |
| 25 | 2008 | 1559 | 122.7 | +0.81 | -3.19 | 0.920 | 48.5% | +7 | -110 | -18 | 47.9% | -0.21 | 3–3 (50%) | 3–2 (60%) | 103.0 | +0.10 | 2005 | 1492 | 115.8 | -0.71 | -0.20 | 0.911 | 47.7% | +24 | — | — | 50.0% | -0.15 | 1–3 (25%) | 2–1 (67%) | 99.5 | +0.20 |
| 26 | 2009 | 1759 | 133.3 | +2.15 | -0.64 | 1.020 | 50.5% | -34 | -162 | -152 | 58.7% | +0.35 | 9–10 (47%) | 7–5 (58%) | 104.0 | -0.55 | 2006 | 1568 | 125.9 | -2.07 | -2.76 | 0.856 | 47.0% | -26 | -35 | +78 | 45.1% | -0.47 | 6–10 (38%) | 3–2 (60%) | 101.1 | -0.24 |
| 27 | 2010 | 1533 | 110.0 | -1.99 | -4.02 | 0.807 | 45.6% | +115 | -53 | +11 | 23.3% | -1.44 | 3–4 (43%) | 2–5 (29%) | 96.8 | -0.52 | 2007 | 1781 | 148.6 | +3.74 | +2.99 | 1.182 | 53.4% | -39 | -64 | -97 | 63.8% | +1.01 | 6–11 (35%) | 6–7 (46%) | 96.6 | +1.23 |
| 28 | 2011 | 1526 | 106.8 | +0.76 | +0.06 | 0.926 | 48.6% | +77 | — | +41 | 40.9% | -0.68 | 1–3 (25%) | 1–2 (33%) | 96.2 | +0.11 | 2008 | 1718 | 130.0 | -1.29 | +1.00 | 0.973 | 49.3% | +25 | -53 | -79 | 51.2% | -0.20 | 10–11 (48%) | 6–5 (55%) | 97.6 | +4.02 |
| 29 | 2012 | 1544 | 120.7 | +2.01 | -3.55 | 0.942 | 49.0% | +9 | -66 | +104 | 40.7% | -0.48 | 3–6 (33%) | 4–3 (57%) | 99.4 | -0.29 | 2009 | 1672 | 130.3 | -0.57 | +0.29 | 0.966 | 49.1% | +6 | +36 | -62 | 49.5% | -0.11 | 7–6 (54%) | 4–2 (67%) | 102.8 | +0.49 |
| 30 | 2013 | 1500 | 108.6 | -0.99 | -4.61 | 0.816 | 46.1% | +48 | -61 | — | 30.0% | -1.37 | 3–3 (50%) | 1–4 (20%) | 97.5 | -0.51 | 2010 | 1649 | 124.3 | -1.43 | -0.06 | 0.939 | 48.6% | +29 | -16 | -63 | 43.6% | -0.38 | 6–4 (60%) | 2–5 (29%) | 98.7 | -0.29 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2011 | 1570 | 105.8 | -3.05 | -1.68 | 0.813 | 45.3% | +74 | +18 | — | 27.6% | -1.59 | 3–2 (60%) | 1–4 (20%) | 98.3 | -0.29 |
| Career | — | 1796 | 120.5 | +0.70 | -2.25 | 0.922 | 48.4% | +30 | -76 | -4 | 42.0% | -0.58 | 39–45 (46%) | 29–32 (48%) | 99.0 | -0.24 | — | 1846 | 135.5 | +0.06 | +0.67 | 0.994 | 49.8% | +1 | -21 | -54 | 50.0% | -0.07 | 39–51 (43%) | 25–27 (48%) | 97.1 | +1.83 |
Career Rivalries
Each player's five most-played main-draw opponents. The current matchup is highlighted when it appears in a player's top five.
Sybille Bammer
all rivalries →| Opponent | W | L | M | Last Played | H2H |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jelena Jankovic | 1 | 9 | 10 | Mar 4, 2011 | H2H |
| Anna Chakvetadze | 3 | 3 | 6 | Oct 14, 2010 | H2H |
| Vera Zvonareva | 0 | 5 | 5 | Jan 19, 2011 | H2H |
| Elena Dementieva | 1 | 4 | 5 | Sep 2, 2010 | H2H |
| Victoria Azarenka | 1 | 4 | 5 | Mar 13, 2010 | H2H |