H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Nadia Petrova vs Martina Hingis H2H: 1-2
Martina Hingis holds a 2–1 lead over Nadia Petrova in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Martina Hingis leads 2–0 on hard courts, while Nadia Petrova leads 1–0 on carpet. Most recently, Martina Hingis won the 2006 WTA Tour Championships round-robin match 6-4 3-6 6-3.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
RUS
Age 44
Right-Handed
178 cm / 5'10"
H2H
1
–
2
3 main draw meetings
SUI
Age 45
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 6, 2006 | WTA Tour Championships | WTA Finals | RR | Hard | Martina Hingis | 6-4 3-6 6-3 | Nadia Petrova | Match data |
| Oct 3, 2002* | Moscow | WTA 1000 | R32 | Carpet | Nadia Petrova | 6-2 6-2 | Martina Hingis | Match data |
| Aug 17, 2000* | Montreal | WTA 1000 | R32 | Hard | Martina Hingis | 6-1 6-3 | Nadia Petrova | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nadia Petrova | #578 | #3 | 3,882 | 2,077 | 441 | 276 | 61.5% | 0 | 3 | 1 | 7 | 2 | 13 |
| Martina Hingis | #19 | #1 | 6,976 | 2,385 | 515 | 126 | 80.3% | 5 | 18 | 2 | 10 | 8 | 43 |
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 | Nadia Petrova | Martina Hingis | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 13 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1994 | 5–3 | 62.5% | #87 | 1,595 | 0 | 0 |
| 14 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1995 | 18–12 | 60.0% | #16 | 1,826 | 0 | 0 |
| 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1996 | 45–15 | 75.0% | #6 | 2,160 | 0 | 2 |
| 16 | 1998 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #145 | 1,536 | 0 | 0 | 1997 | 72–5 | 93.5% | #1 | 2,321 | 3 | 14 |
| 17 | 1999 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #93 | 1,568 | 0 | 0 | 1998 | 60–12 | 83.3% | #2 | 2,264 | 4 | 19 |
| 18 | 2000 | 12–15 | 44.4% | #60 | 1,624 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 70–12 | 85.4% | #1 | 2,285 | 5 | 26 |
| 19 | 2001 | 20–21 | 48.8% | #39 | 1,682 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 78–10 | 88.6% | #1 | 2,314 | 5 | 35 |
| 20 | 2002 | 7–5 | 58.3% | #112 | 1,758 | 0 | 0 | 2001 | 60–15 | 80.0% | #4 | 2,123 | 5 | 38 |
| 21 | 2003 | 36–20 | 64.3% | #12 | 1,924 | 0 | 0 | 2002 | 34–10 | 77.3% | #10 | 2,050 | 5 | 40 |
| 22 | 2004 | 39–24 | 61.9% | #12 | 1,880 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 23 | 2005 | 56–25 | 69.1% | #9 | 1,945 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 24 | 2006 | 48–19 | 71.6% | #6 | 1,990 | 0 | 6 | 2005 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 2,020 | 5 | 40 |
| 25 | 2007 | 37–18 | 67.3% | #14 | 1,931 | 0 | 7 | 2006 | 53–19 | 73.6% | #7 | 2,013 | 5 | 42 |
| 26 | 2008 | 47–24 | 66.2% | #11 | 1,923 | 0 | 9 | 2007 | 20–12 | 62.5% | #19 | 1,855 | 5 | 43 |
| 27 | 2009 | 30–21 | 58.8% | #20 | 1,821 | 0 | 9 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 2010 | 32–20 | 61.5% | #15 | 1,828 | 0 | 9 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 2011 | 25–21 | 54.3% | #29 | 1,781 | 0 | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 2012 | 37–18 | 67.3% | #12 | 1,917 | 0 | 13 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 2013 | 9–13 | 40.9% | #104 | 1,718 | 0 | 13 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 2014 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #362 | 1,648 | 0 | 13 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |