H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Monica Puig vs Tereza Smitkova H2H: 3-0
Monica Puig holds a 3–0 lead over Tereza Smitkova in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Monica Puig leads 2–0 on hard courts and 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Monica Puig won the 2016 Prague third round 6-2 6-1.
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
3
–
0
3 main draw meetings
CZE
Age 31
Right-Handed
176 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 27, 2016* | Prague | WTA 250 | R32 | Clay | Monica Puig | 6-2 6-1 | Tereza Smitkova | Match data |
| Feb 26, 2015* | Acapulco | WTA 250 | R32 | Hard | Monica Puig | 6-4 3-6 6-3 | Tereza Smitkova | Match data |
| Aug 27, 2014* | US Open | Grand Slam | R128 | Hard | Monica Puig | 3-6 6-3 6-3 | Tereza Smitkova | 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 |
| Tereza Smitkova | #1,143 | #57 | 904 | 1,565 | 15 | 33 | 31.2% | 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 | Monica Puig | Tereza Smitkova | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 2011 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #211 | 1,492 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 2012 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #124 | 1,464 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #214 | 1,498 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2013 | 13–15 | 46.4% | #56 | 1,571 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #69 | 1,510 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2014 | 16–18 | 47.1% | #59 | 1,616 | 0 | 1 | 2015 | 8–16 | 33.3% | #125 | 1,502 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2015 | 15–23 | 39.5% | #92 | 1,579 | 0 | 1 | 2016 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #173 | 1,507 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2016 | 31–22 | 58.5% | #32 | 1,713 | 0 | 1 | 2017 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #236 | 1,491 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2017 | 19–21 | 47.5% | #58 | 1,709 | 0 | 1 | 2018 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #136 | 1,500 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2018 | 18–14 | 56.2% | #53 | 1,775 | 0 | 1 | 2019 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #262 | 1,538 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2019 | 16–17 | 48.5% | #79 | 1,692 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 26 | 2020 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #105 | 1,629 | 0 | 1 | 2021 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #267 | 1,548 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2022 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #1073 | 1,625 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |