H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Olga Govortsova vs Vania King H2H: 1-1
Olga Govortsova and Vania King are tied 1–1 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Vania King leads 1–0 on clay, while Olga Govortsova leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Vania King won the 2009 Charleston second round 6-7(3) 7-6(5) 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.
BLR
Age 37
Right-Handed
182 cm / 6'0"
H2H
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
USA
Age 37
Right-Handed
165 cm / 5'5"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 15, 2009* | Charleston | WTA 500 | R64 | Clay | Vania King | 6-7(3) 7-6(5) 6-3 | Olga Govortsova | Match data |
| Oct 30, 2008* | Quebec City | WTA 500 | R32 | Hard | Olga Govortsova | 6-1 2-6 6-4 | Vania King | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Olga Govortsova | #1,276 | #35 | 1,510 | 1,705 | 123 | 186 | 39.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Vania King | #824 | #50 | 1,225 | 1,760 | 128 | 160 | 44.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
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 | Olga Govortsova | Vania King | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2005 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #164 | 1,520 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 2006 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #337 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 16–13 | 55.2% | #60 | 1,661 | 0 | 1 |
| 18 | 2007 | 14–12 | 53.8% | #48 | 1,596 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 15–21 | 41.7% | #109 | 1,608 | 0 | 1 |
| 19 | 2008 | 21–25 | 45.7% | #47 | 1,602 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 7–19 | 26.9% | #128 | 1,512 | 0 | 1 |
| 20 | 2009 | 26–24 | 52.0% | #50 | 1,693 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 11–12 | 47.8% | #80 | 1,588 | 0 | 1 |
| 21 | 2010 | 13–27 | 32.5% | #75 | 1,604 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 14–17 | 45.2% | #86 | 1,595 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 2011 | 6–19 | 24.0% | #111 | 1,469 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 13–14 | 48.1% | #76 | 1,689 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 2012 | 12–19 | 38.7% | #57 | 1,550 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 15–19 | 44.1% | #69 | 1,614 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 2013 | 12–14 | 46.2% | #93 | 1,625 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 8–11 | 42.1% | #85 | 1,630 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 2014 | 5–12 | 29.4% | #149 | 1,547 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 13–15 | 46.4% | #111 | 1,641 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2015 | 7–11 | 38.9% | #71 | 1,551 | 0 | 0 | 2015 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #410 | 1,627 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2016 | 2–11 | 15.4% | #170 | 1,509 | 0 | 0 | 2016 | 13–11 | 54.2% | #78 | 1,643 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2017 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #320 | 1,510 | 0 | 0 | 2017 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #492 | 1,590 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 2018 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #393 | 1,496 | 0 | 0 | 2018 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #356 | 1,559 | 0 | 1 |
| 30 | 2019 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #192 | 1,451 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 2020 | 3–3 | 50.0% | #134 | 1,547 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 2021 | 0–5 | 0.0% | #139 | 1,510 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |