H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Rosalyn Fairbank vs Jana Novotna H2H: 3-1
Rosalyn Fairbank holds a 3–1 lead over Jana Novotna in their WTA head-to-head. Across 4 main-draw meetings, Rosalyn Fairbank leads 2–0 on hard courts, while Jana Novotna leads 1–0 on carpet. Most recently, Rosalyn Fairbank won the 1992 US Open first round 6-3 7-6(3).
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
USA
Age 65
Right-Handed
173 cm / 5'8"
H2H
3
–
1
4 main draw meetings
CZE
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 2, 1992* | US Open | Grand Slam | R128 | Hard | Rosalyn Fairbank | 6-3 7-6(3) | Jana Novotna | Match data |
| Jun 20, 1992* | Eastbourne | WTA 250 | QF | Grass | Rosalyn Fairbank | 6-1 6-3 | Jana Novotna | Match data |
| Apr 2, 1990* | San Antonio | WTA 250 | QF | Hard | Rosalyn Fairbank | 6-1 2-6 7-5 | Jana Novotna | Match data |
| Nov 12, 1987* | Chicago | WTA 250 | R32 | Carpet | Jana Novotna | 6-1 6-4 | Rosalyn Fairbank | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rosalyn Fairbank | #325 | #15 | 51 | 1,933 | 336 | 309 | 52.1% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Jana Novotna | #18 | #2 | 5,063 | 2,224 | 504 | 198 | 71.8% | 1 | 4 | 1 | 5 | 13 | 24 |
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 | Rosalyn Fairbank | Jana Novotna | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 1978 | 3–2 | 60.0% | — | 1,525 | 0 | 0 | 1986 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #171 | 1,466 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 1979 | 17–10 | 63.0% | — | 1,720 | 0 | 0 | 1987 | 21–17 | 55.3% | #47 | 1,752 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1980 | 22–20 | 52.4% | — | 1,681 | 0 | 0 | 1988 | 23–18 | 56.1% | #35 | 1,757 | 0 | 1 |
| 20 | 1981 | 15–22 | 40.5% | — | 1,657 | 0 | 0 | 1989 | 45–17 | 72.6% | #11 | 1,962 | 0 | 2 |
| 21 | 1982 | 32–21 | 60.4% | — | 1,904 | 0 | 0 | 1990 | 40–16 | 71.4% | #13 | 2,016 | 0 | 3 |
| 22 | 1983 | 24–19 | 55.8% | — | 1,920 | 0 | 1 | 1991 | 45–15 | 75.0% | #7 | 2,072 | 0 | 5 |
| 23 | 1984 | 22–26 | 45.8% | #32 | 1,767 | 0 | 1 | 1992 | 36–17 | 67.9% | #10 | 2,089 | 0 | 5 |
| 24 | 1985 | 28–23 | 54.9% | #38 | 1,806 | 0 | 1 | 1993 | 46–15 | 75.4% | #6 | 2,103 | 0 | 7 |
| 25 | 1986 | 23–20 | 53.5% | #28 | 1,824 | 0 | 1 | 1994 | 43–11 | 79.6% | #4 | 2,141 | 0 | 10 |
| 26 | 1987 | 21–20 | 51.2% | #36 | 1,756 | 0 | 1 | 1995 | 30–12 | 71.4% | #11 | 2,031 | 0 | 11 |
| 27 | 1988 | 27–22 | 55.1% | #37 | 1,775 | 0 | 1 | 1996 | 47–12 | 79.7% | #5 | 2,209 | 0 | 15 |
| 28 | 1989 | 27–18 | 60.0% | #22 | 1,846 | 0 | 1 | 1997 | 52–15 | 77.6% | #2 | 2,173 | 0 | 19 |
| 29 | 1990 | 26–20 | 56.5% | #24 | 1,789 | 0 | 1 | 1998 | 50–14 | 78.1% | #3 | 2,129 | 1 | 23 |
| 30 | 1991 | 14–19 | 42.4% | #90 | 1,637 | 0 | 1 | 1999 | 26–15 | 63.4% | #18 | 1,924 | 1 | 24 |
| 31 | 1992 | 16–16 | 50.0% | #46 | 1,728 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 1993 | 17–19 | 47.2% | #63 | 1,766 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 1994 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #284 | 1,704 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 34 | 1995 | 2–8 | 20.0% | #261 | 1,599 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |