H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Monica Puig vs Mirjana Lucic-Baroni H2H: 2-1
Monica Puig holds a 2–1 lead over Mirjana Lucic-Baroni in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on hard courts, while Monica Puig leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Mirjana Lucic-Baroni won the 2017 US Open first round 6-4 6-7(4) 7-6(4).
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
PUR
Age 32
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H
2
–
1
3 main draw meetings
CRO
Age 44
Right-Handed
181 cm / 5'11"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 30, 2017* | US Open | Grand Slam | R128 | Hard | Mirjana Lucic-Baroni | 6-4 6-7(4) 7-6(4) | Monica Puig | Match data |
| Mar 11, 2016* | Indian Wells | WTA 1000 | R128 | Hard | Monica Puig | 6-1 6-2 | Mirjana Lucic-Baroni | Match data |
| May 23, 2014* | Strasbourg | WTA 500 | R16 | Clay | Monica Puig | 6-3 6-1 | Mirjana Lucic-Baroni | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Monica Puig | #1,073 | #27 | 1,570 | 1,838 | 128 | 136 | 48.5% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Mirjana Lucic-Baroni | #424 | #20 | 1,924 | 1,798 | 136 | 166 | 45.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
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 | Monica Puig | Mirjana Lucic-Baroni | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1997 | 11–3 | 78.6% | #49 | 1,692 | 0 | 1 |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1998 | 15–11 | 57.7% | #51 | 1,776 | 0 | 2 |
| 17 | 2011 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #211 | 1,492 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 11–13 | 45.8% | #48 | 1,757 | 0 | 2 |
| 18 | 2012 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #124 | 1,464 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 2–12 | 14.3% | #202 | 1,601 | 0 | 2 |
| 19 | 2013 | 13–15 | 46.4% | #56 | 1,571 | 0 | 0 | 2001 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #192 | 1,596 | 0 | 2 |
| 20 | 2014 | 16–18 | 47.1% | #59 | 1,616 | 0 | 1 | 2002 | 1–6 | 14.3% | #203 | 1,546 | 0 | 2 |
| 21 | 2015 | 15–23 | 39.5% | #92 | 1,579 | 0 | 1 | 2003 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #348 | 1,526 | 0 | 2 |
| 22 | 2016 | 31–22 | 58.5% | #32 | 1,713 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 23 | 2017 | 19–21 | 47.5% | #58 | 1,709 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 24 | 2018 | 18–14 | 56.2% | #53 | 1,775 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 25 | 2019 | 16–17 | 48.5% | #79 | 1,692 | 0 | 1 | 2007 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #455 | 1,538 | 0 | 2 |
| 26 | 2020 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #105 | 1,629 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 27 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2009 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #258 | 1,519 | 0 | 2 |
| 28 | 2022 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #1073 | 1,625 | 0 | 1 | 2010 | 5–6 | 45.5% | #96 | 1,554 | 0 | 2 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2011 | 8–14 | 36.4% | #129 | 1,551 | 0 | 2 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2012 | 7–12 | 36.8% | #105 | 1,535 | 0 | 2 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2013 | 8–11 | 42.1% | #110 | 1,563 | 0 | 2 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2014 | 12–8 | 60.0% | #60 | 1,706 | 0 | 3 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2015 | 17–26 | 39.5% | #68 | 1,657 | 0 | 3 |
| 34 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2016 | 14–18 | 43.8% | #80 | 1,629 | 0 | 3 |
| 35 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2017 | 20–16 | 55.6% | #32 | 1,698 | 0 | 3 |
| 36 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2018 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #327 | 1,689 | 0 | 3 |