H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 08:25 UTC
Nadia Petrova vs Sabine Appelmans H2H: 1-0
Nadia Petrova holds a 1–0 lead over Sabine Appelmans in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Nadia Petrova leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Nadia Petrova won the 2000 Miami fourth round 6-2 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
–
0
1 main draw meetings
BEL
Age 54
Left-Handed
168 cm / 5'6"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 24, 2000* | Miami | WTA 1000 | R16 | Hard | Nadia Petrova | 6-2 6-3 | Sabine Appelmans | 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 |
| Sabine Appelmans | #94 | #16 | 1,502 | 1,923 | 279 | 202 | 58.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 5 | 7 |
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 | Sabine Appelmans | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1987 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #283 | 1,502 | 0 | 0 |
| 16 | 1998 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #145 | 1,536 | 0 | 0 | 1988 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #196 | 1,498 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 1999 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #93 | 1,568 | 0 | 0 | 1989 | 2–5 | 28.6% | #144 | 1,468 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2000 | 12–15 | 44.4% | #60 | 1,624 | 0 | 0 | 1990 | 21–12 | 63.6% | #22 | 1,679 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2001 | 20–21 | 48.8% | #39 | 1,682 | 0 | 0 | 1991 | 34–14 | 70.8% | #18 | 1,873 | 0 | 2 |
| 20 | 2002 | 7–5 | 58.3% | #112 | 1,758 | 0 | 0 | 1992 | 26–15 | 63.4% | #26 | 1,875 | 0 | 3 |
| 21 | 2003 | 36–20 | 64.3% | #12 | 1,924 | 0 | 0 | 1993 | 19–15 | 55.9% | #36 | 1,828 | 0 | 3 |
| 22 | 2004 | 39–24 | 61.9% | #12 | 1,880 | 0 | 0 | 1994 | 29–16 | 64.4% | #27 | 1,821 | 0 | 5 |
| 23 | 2005 | 56–25 | 69.1% | #9 | 1,945 | 0 | 1 | 1995 | 24–17 | 58.5% | #31 | 1,809 | 0 | 6 |
| 24 | 2006 | 48–19 | 71.6% | #6 | 1,990 | 0 | 6 | 1996 | 26–16 | 61.9% | #21 | 1,843 | 0 | 7 |
| 25 | 2007 | 37–18 | 67.3% | #14 | 1,931 | 0 | 7 | 1997 | 37–26 | 58.7% | #16 | 1,856 | 0 | 7 |
| 26 | 2008 | 47–24 | 66.2% | #11 | 1,923 | 0 | 9 | 1998 | 13–18 | 41.9% | #48 | 1,721 | 0 | 7 |
| 27 | 2009 | 30–21 | 58.8% | #20 | 1,821 | 0 | 9 | 1999 | 25–21 | 54.3% | #30 | 1,777 | 0 | 7 |
| 28 | 2010 | 32–20 | 61.5% | #15 | 1,828 | 0 | 9 | 2000 | 20–22 | 47.6% | #49 | 1,692 | 0 | 7 |
| 29 | 2011 | 25–21 | 54.3% | #29 | 1,781 | 0 | 10 | 2001 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #94 | 1,685 | 0 | 7 |
| 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 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |