H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 17:48 UTC
Sabine Lisicki vs Jill Craybas H2H: 0-1
Jill Craybas holds a 1–0 lead over Sabine Lisicki in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Jill Craybas leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Jill Craybas won the 2010 Indian Wells second round 4-6 7-5 2-0 RET.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
GER
Age 36
Right-Handed
178 cm / 5'10"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
USA
Age 52
Right-Handed
160 cm / 5'3"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 10, 2010* | Indian Wells | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard | Jill Craybas | 4-6 7-5 2-0 (ret.) | Sabine Lisicki | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sabine Lisicki | #502 | #12 | 3,251 | 1,940 | 206 | 172 | 54.5% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 4 |
| Jill Craybas | #336 | #39 | 974 | 1,695 | 161 | 256 | 38.6% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 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 | Sabine Lisicki | Jill Craybas | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | 2006 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #444 | 1,489 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 2007 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #198 | 1,475 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 2008 | 16–18 | 47.1% | #57 | 1,606 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 2009 | 29–17 | 63.0% | #22 | 1,792 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 2010 | 4–9 | 30.8% | #175 | 1,658 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 21 | 2011 | 35–13 | 72.9% | #15 | 1,872 | 0 | 3 | 1996 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,488 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2012 | 15–18 | 45.5% | #37 | 1,707 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 23 | 2013 | 34–19 | 64.2% | #15 | 1,824 | 0 | 3 | 1998 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #154 | 1,473 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2014 | 27–21 | 56.2% | #26 | 1,798 | 0 | 4 | 1999 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #175 | 1,445 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2015 | 22–19 | 53.7% | #32 | 1,791 | 0 | 4 | 2000 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #145 | 1,449 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2016 | 14–19 | 42.4% | #93 | 1,647 | 0 | 4 | 2001 | 8–17 | 32.0% | #98 | 1,479 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2017 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #220 | 1,636 | 0 | 4 | 2002 | 19–15 | 55.9% | #57 | 1,652 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2018 | 5–4 | 55.6% | #199 | 1,549 | 0 | 4 | 2003 | 16–22 | 42.1% | #99 | 1,568 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 2019 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #562 | 1,479 | 0 | 4 | 2004 | 12–21 | 36.4% | #59 | 1,499 | 0 | 1 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2005 | 19–23 | 45.2% | #48 | 1,614 | 0 | 1 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2006 | 18–25 | 41.9% | #70 | 1,569 | 0 | 1 |
| 32 | 2022 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #342 | 1,575 | 0 | 4 | 2007 | 12–27 | 30.8% | #79 | 1,472 | 0 | 1 |
| 33 | 2023 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #311 | 1,569 | 0 | 4 | 2008 | 22–25 | 46.8% | #64 | 1,575 | 0 | 1 |
| 34 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2009 | 12–21 | 36.4% | #76 | 1,592 | 0 | 1 |
| 35 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2010 | 12–23 | 34.3% | #98 | 1,546 | 0 | 1 |
| 36 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2011 | 6–20 | 23.1% | #150 | 1,442 | 0 | 1 |
| 37 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2012 | 3–7 | 30.0% | #189 | 1,449 | 0 | 1 |
| 38 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2013 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #336 | 1,451 | 0 | 1 |