H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 17:48 UTC
Raffaella Reggi Concato vs Leila Meskhi H2H: 1-1
Raffaella Reggi Concato and Leila Meskhi are tied 1–1 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Raffaella Reggi Concato leads 1–0 on carpet, while Leila Meskhi leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Leila Meskhi won the 1990 Indianapolis quarterfinal 3-6 7-5 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.
Age 60
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
GEO
Age 58
Right-Handed
164 cm / 5'5"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 10, 1990* | Indianapolis | WTA 250 | QF | Hard | Leila Meskhi | 3-6 7-5 6-3 | Raffaella Reggi Concato | Match data |
| Feb 3, 1989* | Tokyo Pan Pacific | WTA 250 | R32 | Carpet | Raffaella Reggi Concato | 6-3 6-4 | Leila Meskhi | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Raffaella Reggi Concato | — | — | — | 1,930 | 256 | 176 | 59.3% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Leila Meskhi | #903 | #12 | 72 | 2,001 | 192 | 119 | 61.7% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 5 |
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 | Raffaella Reggi Concato | Leila Meskhi | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 14 | 1980 | 1–1 | 50.0% | — | 1,497 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 15 | 1981 | 0–5 | 0.0% | — | 1,431 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 16 | 1982 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,424 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 1983 | 21–20 | 51.2% | — | 1,671 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 1984 | 17–14 | 54.8% | — | 1,754 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 1985 | 26–19 | 57.8% | — | 1,783 | 0 | 1 | 1987 | 11–7 | 61.1% | #46 | 1,655 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1986 | 31–20 | 60.8% | — | 1,896 | 0 | 3 | 1988 | 17–17 | 50.0% | #46 | 1,688 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1987 | 39–21 | 65.0% | — | 1,903 | 0 | 4 | 1989 | 21–14 | 60.0% | #30 | 1,794 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 1988 | 27–15 | 64.3% | — | 1,872 | 0 | 4 | 1990 | 38–14 | 73.1% | #19 | 1,928 | 0 | 3 |
| 23 | 1989 | 39–22 | 63.9% | — | 1,863 | 0 | 4 | 1991 | 30–14 | 68.2% | #15 | 1,937 | 0 | 4 |
| 24 | 1990 | 31–16 | 66.0% | — | 1,818 | 0 | 5 | 1992 | 26–15 | 63.4% | #22 | 1,939 | 0 | 4 |
| 25 | 1991 | 11–11 | 50.0% | — | 1,708 | 0 | 5 | 1993 | 22–17 | 56.4% | #37 | 1,874 | 0 | 4 |
| 26 | 1992 | 13–11 | 54.2% | — | 1,719 | 0 | 5 | 1994 | 22–15 | 59.5% | #34 | 1,843 | 0 | 4 |
| 27 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1995 | 5–2 | 71.4% | #141 | 1,834 | 0 | 5 |
| 28 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1996 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #838 | 1,748 | 0 | 5 |