H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Samantha Stosur vs Alicia Molik H2H: 1-1
Samantha Stosur and Alicia Molik are tied 1–1 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Samantha Stosur leads 1–0 on carpet, while Alicia Molik leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Samantha Stosur won the 2005 Moscow third round 6-3 6-2.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
AUS
Age 42
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
AUS
Age 45
Right-Handed
182 cm / 6'0"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 13, 2005* | Moscow | WTA 1000 | R32 | Carpet | Samantha Stosur | 6-3 6-2 | Alicia Molik | Match data |
| Jan 16, 2005* | Sydney | WTA 500 | F | Hard | Alicia Molik | 6-7(5) 6-4 7-5 | Samantha Stosur | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Samantha Stosur | #531 | #4 | 6,195 | 2,068 | 451 | 335 | 57.4% | 1 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 4 | 9 |
| Alicia Molik | #403 | #8 | 2,630 | 2,035 | 151 | 161 | 48.4% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 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 | Samantha Stosur | Alicia Molik | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 18 | 2002 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #245 | 1,475 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 7–12 | 36.8% | #96 | 1,537 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2003 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #163 | 1,492 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 6–10 | 37.5% | #115 | 1,552 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2004 | 17–16 | 51.5% | #65 | 1,609 | 0 | 0 | 2001 | 14–17 | 45.2% | #47 | 1,613 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2005 | 18–22 | 45.0% | #46 | 1,607 | 0 | 0 | 2002 | 10–19 | 34.5% | #94 | 1,568 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2006 | 29–24 | 54.7% | #29 | 1,749 | 0 | 0 | 2003 | 25–16 | 61.0% | #36 | 1,705 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 2007 | 15–15 | 50.0% | #46 | 1,723 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 37–18 | 67.3% | #13 | 1,938 | 0 | 4 |
| 24 | 2008 | 17–11 | 60.7% | #52 | 1,746 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 17–14 | 54.8% | #28 | 1,779 | 0 | 5 |
| 25 | 2009 | 38–20 | 65.5% | #13 | 1,885 | 0 | 1 | 2006 | 6–14 | 30.0% | #165 | 1,632 | 0 | 5 |
| 26 | 2010 | 43–19 | 69.4% | #6 | 1,927 | 0 | 2 | 2007 | 18–22 | 45.0% | #56 | 1,628 | 0 | 5 |
| 27 | 2011 | 46–21 | 68.7% | #6 | 1,977 | 1 | 3 | 2008 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #308 | 1,577 | 0 | 5 |
| 28 | 2012 | 40–23 | 63.5% | #9 | 1,883 | 1 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 2013 | 40–22 | 64.5% | #18 | 1,902 | 1 | 5 | 2010 | 8–12 | 40.0% | #129 | 1,561 | 0 | 5 |
| 30 | 2014 | 32–22 | 59.3% | #22 | 1,883 | 1 | 6 | 2011 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #349 | 1,584 | 0 | 5 |
| 31 | 2015 | 34–22 | 60.7% | #27 | 1,789 | 1 | 8 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 2016 | 24–19 | 55.8% | #21 | 1,716 | 1 | 8 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 2017 | 22–19 | 53.7% | #41 | 1,734 | 1 | 9 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 34 | 2018 | 17–23 | 42.5% | #74 | 1,663 | 1 | 9 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 35 | 2019 | 14–16 | 46.7% | #99 | 1,631 | 1 | 9 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 36 | 2020 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #112 | 1,607 | 1 | 9 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 37 | 2021 | 1–9 | 10.0% | #382 | 1,522 | 1 | 9 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 38 | 2022 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #529 | 1,511 | 1 | 9 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |