H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 08:25 UTC
Petra Cetkovska vs Stephanie Foretz Gacon H2H: 2-0
Petra Cetkovska holds a 2–0 lead over Stephanie Foretz Gacon in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Petra Cetkovska leads 1–0 on grass and 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Petra Cetkovska won the 2009 Birmingham second round 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.
CZE
Age 41
Right-Handed
172 cm / 5'8"
H2H
2
–
0
2 main draw meetings
Age 45
Right-Handed
166 cm / 5'5"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 10, 2009* | Birmingham | WTA 250 | R64 | Grass | Petra Cetkovska | 7-6(5) 6-3 | Stephanie Foretz Gacon | Match data |
| Mar 10, 2009* | Indian Wells | WTA 1000 | R128 | Hard | Petra Cetkovska | 6-2 7-5 | Stephanie Foretz Gacon | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Petra Cetkovska | #954 | #25 | 1,955 | 1,761 | 73 | 81 | 47.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Stephanie Foretz Gacon | — | — | — | 1,647 | 61 | 115 | 34.7% | 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 | Petra Cetkovska | Stephanie Foretz Gacon | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1999 | 1–2 | 33.3% | — | 1,511 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2000 | 1–2 | 33.3% | — | 1,513 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2001 | 5–6 | 45.5% | — | 1,558 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2002 | 11–12 | 47.8% | — | 1,605 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2007 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #104 | 1,501 | 0 | 0 | 2003 | 12–15 | 44.4% | — | 1,588 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2008 | 12–15 | 44.4% | #83 | 1,515 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 3–10 | 23.1% | — | 1,532 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2009 | 7–12 | 36.8% | #149 | 1,510 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 5–14 | 26.3% | — | 1,501 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2010 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #143 | 1,506 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 5–14 | 26.3% | — | 1,444 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2011 | 15–9 | 62.5% | #31 | 1,690 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 2–6 | 25.0% | — | 1,457 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2012 | 17–14 | 54.8% | #55 | 1,724 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 0–2 | 0.0% | — | 1,455 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2013 | 5–8 | 38.5% | #139 | 1,651 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 2–7 | 22.2% | — | 1,421 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2014 | 13–11 | 54.2% | #58 | 1,699 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 0–3 | 0.0% | — | 1,402 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2015 | 2–6 | 25.0% | #130 | 1,632 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 2–6 | 25.0% | — | 1,406 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | 2016 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #591 | 1,598 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 10–10 | 50.0% | — | 1,514 | 0 | 0 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2013 | 2–5 | 28.6% | — | 1,502 | 0 | 0 |
| 34 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2015 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,492 | 0 | 0 |