H2H data updated: 2026-07-20 14:15 UTC
Serena Williams vs Amélie Mauresmo H2H: 11-2
Serena Williams holds a 11–2 lead over Amélie Mauresmo in their WTA head-to-head. Across 13 main-draw meetings, Serena Williams leads 4–1 on hard courts and 2–1 on clay. Most recently, Serena Williams won the 2008 Wimbledon third round 7-6(5) 6-1.
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 44
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H
11
–
2
13 main draw meetings
FRA
Age 47
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 28, 2008* | Wimbledon | Grand Slam | R32 | Grass | Serena Williams | 7-6(5) 6-1 | Amélie Mauresmo | Match data |
| Sep 5, 2006* | US Open | Grand Slam | R16 | Hard | Amélie Mauresmo | 6-4 0-6 6-2 | Serena Williams | Match data |
| Jan 27, 2005* | Australian Open | Grand Slam | QF | Hard | Serena Williams | 6-2 6-2 | Amélie Mauresmo | Match data |
| Nov 17, 2004* | WTA Tour Championships | WTA Finals | SF | Hard | Serena Williams | 4-6 7-6(2) 6-4 | Amélie Mauresmo | Match data |
| Jul 4, 2004* | Wimbledon | Grand Slam | SF | Grass | Serena Williams | 6-7(4) 7-5 6-4 | Amélie Mauresmo | Match data |
| Jun 5, 2003* | Roland Garros | Grand Slam | QF | Clay | Serena Williams | 6-1 6-2 | Amélie Mauresmo | Match data |
| May 17, 2003* | Rome | WTA 1000 | SF | Clay | Amélie Mauresmo | 1-6 7-5 6-3 | Serena Williams | Match data |
| Feb 9, 2003* | Paris | WTA 500 | F | Carpet | Serena Williams | 6-3 6-2 | Amélie Mauresmo | Match data |
| Jul 7, 2002* | Wimbledon | Grand Slam | SF | Grass | Serena Williams | 6-2 6-1 | Amélie Mauresmo | Match data |
| May 11, 2002* | Berlin | WTA 1000 | QF | Clay | Serena Williams | (w/o) | Amélie Mauresmo | Match data |
| Jan 11, 2002* | Sydney | WTA 500 | QF | Hard | Serena Williams | 6-4 7-6(6) | Amélie Mauresmo | Match data |
| Feb 19, 2000* | Hanover | WTA 500 | SF | Hard | Serena Williams | 6-2 6-7(4) 7-6(3) | Amélie Mauresmo | Match data |
| Feb 28, 1999* | Paris | WTA 500 | F | Carpet | Serena Williams | 6-2 3-6 7-6 | Amélie Mauresmo | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Serena Williams | #320 | #1 | 13,615 | 2,405 | 825 | 170 | 82.9% | 23 | 23 | 5 | 17 | 3 | 71 |
| Amélie Mauresmo | #21 | #1 | 4,992 | 2,217 | 458 | 183 | 71.5% | 2 | 6 | 1 | 15 | 1 | 25 |
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 | Serena Williams | Amélie Mauresmo | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 15 | 1997 | 3–2 | 60.0% | #101 | 1,582 | 0 | 0 | 1995 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #250 | 1,488 | 0 | 0 |
| 16 | 1998 | 26–11 | 70.3% | #20 | 1,895 | 0 | 0 | 1996 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #180 | 1,522 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 1999 | 37–7 | 84.1% | #4 | 2,170 | 1 | 4 | 1997 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #100 | 1,555 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2000 | 37–8 | 82.2% | #6 | 2,174 | 1 | 7 | 1998 | 20–18 | 52.6% | #29 | 1,729 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2001 | 40–7 | 85.1% | #6 | 2,259 | 1 | 10 | 1999 | 32–14 | 69.6% | #10 | 1,914 | 0 | 1 |
| 20 | 2002 | 57–5 | 91.9% | #1 | 2,348 | 4 | 18 | 2000 | 26–12 | 68.4% | #16 | 1,932 | 0 | 2 |
| 21 | 2003 | 36–3 | 92.3% | #3 | 2,369 | 6 | 22 | 2001 | 43–12 | 78.2% | #9 | 2,029 | 0 | 6 |
| 22 | 2004 | 39–11 | 78.0% | #7 | 2,192 | 6 | 24 | 2002 | 45–15 | 75.0% | #6 | 2,060 | 0 | 8 |
| 23 | 2005 | 21–9 | 70.0% | #11 | 2,028 | 7 | 25 | 2003 | 45–17 | 72.6% | #4 | 2,061 | 0 | 10 |
| 24 | 2006 | 12–4 | 75.0% | #95 | 2,016 | 7 | 25 | 2004 | 56–11 | 83.6% | #2 | 2,175 | 0 | 15 |
| 25 | 2007 | 34–10 | 77.3% | #7 | 2,058 | 8 | 27 | 2005 | 53–16 | 76.8% | #3 | 2,127 | 0 | 19 |
| 26 | 2008 | 41–8 | 83.7% | #2 | 2,109 | 9 | 31 | 2006 | 50–14 | 78.1% | #3 | 2,135 | 2 | 23 |
| 27 | 2009 | 50–13 | 79.4% | #1 | 2,106 | 11 | 34 | 2007 | 27–14 | 65.9% | #18 | 1,960 | 2 | 24 |
| 28 | 2010 | 25–4 | 86.2% | #4 | 2,149 | 13 | 36 | 2008 | 30–19 | 61.2% | #24 | 1,815 | 2 | 24 |
| 29 | 2011 | 22–4 | 84.6% | #12 | 2,155 | 13 | 38 | 2009 | 25–12 | 67.6% | #21 | 1,871 | 2 | 25 |
| 30 | 2012 | 48–6 | 88.9% | #3 | 2,239 | 15 | 44 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 2013 | 77–5 | 93.9% | #1 | 2,345 | 17 | 55 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 2014 | 52–10 | 83.9% | #1 | 2,209 | 18 | 62 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 2015 | 50–6 | 89.3% | #1 | 2,197 | 21 | 67 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 34 | 2016 | 36–5 | 87.8% | #2 | 2,177 | 22 | 69 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 35 | 2017 | 8–1 | 88.9% | #22 | 2,172 | 23 | 70 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 36 | 2018 | 18–7 | 72.0% | #16 | 2,078 | 23 | 70 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 37 | 2019 | 25–8 | 75.8% | #10 | 2,052 | 23 | 70 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 38 | 2020 | 16–5 | 76.2% | #11 | 1,991 | 23 | 71 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 39 | 2021 | 12–6 | 66.7% | #41 | 1,950 | 23 | 71 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 40 | 2022 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #320 | 1,891 | 23 | 71 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 44 | 2026 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #320 | — | 23 | 71 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |