H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 16:32 UTC
Naomi Osaka vs Lucie Hradecka H2H: 1-0
Naomi Osaka holds a 1–0 lead over Lucie Hradecka in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Naomi Osaka leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Naomi Osaka won the 2016 Tianjin fourth round 6-2 7-6(4).
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
JPN
Age 28
Right-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
CZE
Age 41
Right-Handed
177 cm / 5'10"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 14, 2016* | Tianjin | WTA 250 | R16 | Hard | Naomi Osaka | 6-2 7-6(4) | Lucie Hradecka | 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 |
| Lucie Hradecka | #1,142 | #41 | 1,271 | 1,726 | 92 | 120 | 43.4% | 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 | Naomi Osaka | Lucie Hradecka | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 21 | 2019 | 40–13 | 75.5% | #3 | 2,030 | 2 | 5 | 2006 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #220 | 1,491 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2020 | 16–3 | 84.2% | #3 | 2,082 | 3 | 6 | 2007 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #223 | 1,476 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2021 | 18–7 | 72.0% | #13 | 2,002 | 4 | 7 | 2008 | 4–3 | 57.1% | #118 | 1,522 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2022 | 15–11 | 57.7% | #42 | 1,894 | 4 | 7 | 2009 | 14–11 | 56.0% | #64 | 1,599 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2010 | 5–17 | 22.7% | #110 | 1,498 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2024 | 21–16 | 56.8% | #57 | 1,883 | 4 | 7 | 2011 | 16–20 | 44.4% | #52 | 1,580 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2025 | 31–14 | 68.9% | #16 | 1,968 | 4 | 8 | 2012 | 18–17 | 51.4% | #46 | 1,653 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2026 | 19–8 | 70.4% | #13 | 2,044 | 4 | 8 | 2013 | 5–11 | 31.2% | #148 | 1,562 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2014 | 3–3 | 50.0% | #154 | 1,587 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2015 | 17–17 | 50.0% | #53 | 1,641 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2016 | 5–13 | 27.8% | #166 | 1,586 | 0 | 0 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2017 | 4–3 | 57.1% | #193 | 1,621 | 0 | 0 |
| 34 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2019 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #302 | 1,615 | 0 | 0 |
| 36 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2021 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #567 | 1,549 | 0 | 0 |