H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Monica Seles vs Iva Majoli H2H: 2-1
Monica Seles holds a 2–1 lead over Iva Majoli in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on carpet, while Monica Seles leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Iva Majoli won the 1996 Tokyo quarterfinal 1-6 7-6 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 52
Left-Handed
178 cm / 5'10"
H2H
2
–
1
3 main draw meetings
CRO
Age 48
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 3, 1996* | Tokyo | WTA 1000 | QF | Carpet | Iva Majoli | 1-6 7-6 6-4 | Monica Seles | Match data |
| Jan 26, 1996* | Australian Open | Grand Slam | QF | Hard | Monica Seles | 6-1 6-2 | Iva Majoli | Match data |
| Nov 7, 1992* | Oakland | WTA 250 | QF | Carpet | Monica Seles | 6-3 6-1 | Iva Majoli | 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 Seles | #223 | #1 | 4,056 | 2,540 | 578 | 121 | 82.7% | 9 | 12 | 3 | 7 | 22 | 53 |
| 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 | Monica Seles | Iva Majoli | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 14 | 1988 | 5–3 | 62.5% | #86 | 1,600 | 0 | 0 | 1992 | 7–6 | 53.8% | #50 | 1,624 | 0 | 0 |
| 15 | 1989 | 33–9 | 78.6% | #6 | 2,002 | 0 | 1 | 1993 | 13–13 | 50.0% | #46 | 1,736 | 0 | 0 |
| 16 | 1990 | 55–6 | 90.2% | #2 | 2,295 | 1 | 10 | 1994 | 38–19 | 66.7% | #13 | 1,922 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 1991 | 74–6 | 92.5% | #1 | 2,443 | 4 | 20 | 1995 | 29–12 | 70.7% | #9 | 2,046 | 0 | 2 |
| 18 | 1992 | 70–5 | 93.3% | #1 | 2,499 | 7 | 30 | 1996 | 39–16 | 70.9% | #8 | 2,040 | 0 | 4 |
| 19 | 1993 | 17–2 | 89.5% | #8 | 2,485 | 8 | 32 | 1997 | 43–21 | 67.2% | #6 | 1,947 | 1 | 7 |
| 20 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1998 | 23–20 | 53.5% | #25 | 1,828 | 1 | 7 |
| 21 | 1995 | 11–1 | 91.7% | #1 | 2,487 | 8 | 33 | 1999 | 5–11 | 31.2% | #164 | 1,694 | 1 | 7 |
| 22 | 1996 | 43–8 | 84.3% | #2 | 2,342 | 9 | 38 | 2000 | 11–10 | 52.4% | #62 | 1,703 | 1 | 7 |
| 23 | 1997 | 45–14 | 76.3% | #5 | 2,159 | 9 | 41 | 2001 | 20–22 | 47.6% | #44 | 1,697 | 1 | 7 |
| 24 | 1998 | 42–13 | 76.4% | #6 | 2,174 | 9 | 43 | 2002 | 23–22 | 51.1% | #32 | 1,668 | 1 | 8 |
| 25 | 1999 | 36–12 | 75.0% | #6 | 2,116 | 9 | 44 | 2003 | 7–15 | 31.8% | #131 | 1,589 | 1 | 8 |
| 26 | 2000 | 51–12 | 81.0% | #4 | 2,144 | 9 | 47 | 2004 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #321 | 1,564 | 1 | 8 |
| 27 | 2001 | 40–10 | 80.0% | #10 | 2,127 | 9 | 51 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 2002 | 46–13 | 78.0% | #7 | 2,088 | 9 | 53 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 2003 | 10–7 | 58.8% | #60 | 1,993 | 9 | 53 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |