H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Shahar Peer vs Elena Bovina H2H: 1-0
Shahar Peer holds a 1–0 lead over Elena Bovina in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Shahar Peer leads 1–0 on carpet. Most recently, Shahar Peer won the 2006 Moscow third round 6-0 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.
ISR
Age 39
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
RUS
Age 43
Right-Handed
189 cm / 6'2"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 12, 2006* | Moscow | WTA 1000 | R32 | Carpet | Shahar Peer | 6-0 6-2 | Elena Bovina | 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 |
| Elena Bovina | #777 | #14 | 1,758 | 1,960 | 127 | 110 | 53.6% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
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 | Elena Bovina | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 2000 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #133 | 1,500 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2005 | 22–20 | 52.4% | #45 | 1,636 | 0 | 0 | 2001 | 16–19 | 45.7% | #49 | 1,576 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2006 | 38–20 | 65.5% | #20 | 1,826 | 0 | 3 | 2002 | 29–19 | 60.4% | #26 | 1,803 | 0 | 2 |
| 20 | 2007 | 39–21 | 65.0% | #17 | 1,830 | 0 | 3 | 2003 | 25–22 | 53.2% | #21 | 1,831 | 0 | 2 |
| 21 | 2008 | 24–20 | 54.5% | #38 | 1,707 | 0 | 3 | 2004 | 37–18 | 67.3% | #15 | 1,951 | 0 | 3 |
| 22 | 2009 | 36–21 | 63.2% | #30 | 1,787 | 0 | 5 | 2005 | 12–8 | 60.0% | #61 | 1,908 | 0 | 3 |
| 23 | 2010 | 47–21 | 69.1% | #13 | 1,885 | 0 | 5 | 2006 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #1431 | 1,862 | 0 | 3 |
| 24 | 2011 | 23–21 | 52.3% | #37 | 1,706 | 0 | 5 | 2007 | 1–6 | 14.3% | #329 | 1,757 | 0 | 3 |
| 25 | 2012 | 15–22 | 40.5% | #74 | 1,584 | 0 | 5 | 2008 | 2–1 | 66.7% | #186 | 1,756 | 0 | 3 |
| 26 | 2013 | 10–14 | 41.7% | #77 | 1,558 | 0 | 5 | 2009 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #210 | 1,728 | 0 | 3 |
| 27 | 2014 | 10–18 | 35.7% | #117 | 1,539 | 0 | 5 | 2010 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #162 | 1,653 | 0 | 3 |
| 28 | 2015 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #177 | 1,526 | 0 | 5 | 2011 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #301 | 1,599 | 0 | 3 |