H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 04:32 UTC
Naomi Osaka vs Lesia Tsurenko H2H: 2-1
Naomi Osaka holds a 2–1 lead over Lesia Tsurenko in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Naomi Osaka leads 2–1 on hard courts. Most recently, Naomi Osaka won the 2024 Doha fourth round W/O.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
JPN
Age 28
Right-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H
2
–
1
3 main draw meetings
UKR
Age 37
Right-Handed
174 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 15, 2024* | Doha | WTA 1000 | R16 | Hard | Naomi Osaka | (w/o) | Lesia Tsurenko | Match data |
| Jan 5, 2019 | Brisbane | WTA 500 | SF | Hard | Lesia Tsurenko | 6-2 6-4 | Naomi Osaka | Match data |
| Sep 6, 2018* | US Open | Grand Slam | QF | Hard | Naomi Osaka | 6-1 6-1 | Lesia Tsurenko | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Naomi Osaka | #13 | #1 | 7,985 | 2,140 | 240 | 130 | 64.9% | 4 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 8 |
| Lesia Tsurenko | #370 | #23 | 2,030 | 1,889 | 180 | 200 | 47.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 4 |
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 | Naomi Osaka | Lesia Tsurenko | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | 2014 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #260 | 1,531 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 2015 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #144 | 1,509 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 2016 | 20–13 | 60.6% | #48 | 1,700 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 2017 | 19–22 | 46.3% | #68 | 1,697 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 2018 | 39–19 | 67.2% | #5 | 1,904 | 1 | 2 | 2009 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #284 | 1,483 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2019 | 40–13 | 75.5% | #3 | 2,030 | 2 | 5 | 2010 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #155 | 1,468 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2020 | 16–3 | 84.2% | #3 | 2,082 | 3 | 6 | 2011 | 3–7 | 30.0% | #113 | 1,467 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2021 | 18–7 | 72.0% | #13 | 2,002 | 4 | 7 | 2012 | 7–12 | 36.8% | #116 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2022 | 15–11 | 57.7% | #42 | 1,894 | 4 | 7 | 2013 | 11–18 | 37.9% | #68 | 1,507 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2014 | 4–8 | 33.3% | #92 | 1,511 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2024 | 21–16 | 56.8% | #57 | 1,883 | 4 | 7 | 2015 | 22–17 | 56.4% | #33 | 1,738 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2025 | 31–14 | 68.9% | #16 | 1,968 | 4 | 8 | 2016 | 19–19 | 50.0% | #57 | 1,728 | 0 | 2 |
| 28 | 2026 | 19–8 | 70.4% | #13 | 2,044 | 4 | 8 | 2017 | 22–24 | 47.8% | #42 | 1,699 | 0 | 3 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2018 | 26–18 | 59.1% | #27 | 1,814 | 0 | 4 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2019 | 14–14 | 50.0% | #73 | 1,734 | 0 | 4 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2020 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #146 | 1,746 | 0 | 4 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2021 | 6–10 | 37.5% | #118 | 1,738 | 0 | 4 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2022 | 10–11 | 47.6% | #137 | 1,745 | 0 | 4 |
| 34 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2023 | 24–15 | 61.5% | #31 | 1,866 | 0 | 4 |
| 35 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2024 | 10–20 | 33.3% | #115 | 1,693 | 0 | 4 |