H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Shahar Peer vs Anastasia Myskina H2H: 2-1
Shahar Peer holds a 2–1 lead over Anastasia Myskina in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on clay, while Shahar Peer leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Shahar Peer won the 2006 Montreal third round 7-6(6) 5-7 6-4.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
ISR
Age 39
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H
2
–
1
3 main draw meetings
RUS
Age 45
Right-Handed
174 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 17, 2006* | Montreal | WTA 1000 | R32 | Hard | Shahar Peer | 7-6(6) 5-7 6-4 | Anastasia Myskina | Match data |
| May 28, 2006* | Istanbul | WTA 500 | F | Clay | Shahar Peer | 1-6 6-3 7-6(3) | Anastasia Myskina | Match data |
| Apr 7, 2005* | Amelia Island | WTA 500 | R32 | Clay | Anastasia Myskina | 6-2 3-6 6-3 | Shahar Peer | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Shahar Peer | #1,185 | #11 | 3,410 | 1,966 | 268 | 204 | 56.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Anastasia Myskina | #1,101 | #2 | 4,247 | 2,084 | 235 | 138 | 63.0% | 1 | 3 | 0 | 4 | 2 | 10 |
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 | Shahar Peer | Anastasia Myskina | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 2004 | 3–3 | 50.0% | #176 | 1,509 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 10–6 | 62.5% | #65 | 1,620 | 0 | 1 |
| 18 | 2005 | 22–20 | 52.4% | #45 | 1,636 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 15–17 | 46.9% | #58 | 1,657 | 0 | 1 |
| 19 | 2006 | 38–20 | 65.5% | #20 | 1,826 | 0 | 3 | 2001 | 11–13 | 45.8% | #59 | 1,707 | 0 | 1 |
| 20 | 2007 | 39–21 | 65.0% | #17 | 1,830 | 0 | 3 | 2002 | 46–27 | 63.0% | #11 | 1,882 | 0 | 2 |
| 21 | 2008 | 24–20 | 54.5% | #38 | 1,707 | 0 | 3 | 2003 | 42–21 | 66.7% | #7 | 1,958 | 0 | 6 |
| 22 | 2009 | 36–21 | 63.2% | #30 | 1,787 | 0 | 5 | 2004 | 45–16 | 73.8% | #3 | 2,040 | 1 | 9 |
| 23 | 2010 | 47–21 | 69.1% | #13 | 1,885 | 0 | 5 | 2005 | 35–18 | 66.0% | #14 | 1,934 | 1 | 10 |
| 24 | 2011 | 23–21 | 52.3% | #37 | 1,706 | 0 | 5 | 2006 | 31–18 | 63.3% | #16 | 1,818 | 1 | 10 |
| 25 | 2012 | 15–22 | 40.5% | #74 | 1,584 | 0 | 5 | 2007 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #1043 | 1,769 | 1 | 10 |
| 26 | 2013 | 10–14 | 41.7% | #77 | 1,558 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 27 | 2014 | 10–18 | 35.7% | #117 | 1,539 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 2015 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #177 | 1,526 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |