H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Shahar Peer vs Elena Likhovtseva H2H: 1-1
Shahar Peer and Elena Likhovtseva are tied 1–1 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Shahar Peer leads 1–0 on grass, while Elena Likhovtseva leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Shahar Peer won the 2007 Eastbourne third round 6-2 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
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
RUS
Age 50
Right-Handed
174 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 21, 2007* | Eastbourne | WTA 500 | R32 | Grass | Shahar Peer | 6-2 5-7 6-4 | Elena Likhovtseva | Match data |
| Aug 4, 2005* | San Diego | WTA 1000 | R32 | Hard | Elena Likhovtseva | 0-6 6-2 6-4 | 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 |
| Elena Likhovtseva | #1,092 | #15 | 1,807 | 1,912 | 358 | 338 | 51.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 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 Likhovtseva | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1993 | 11–8 | 57.9% | #67 | 1,633 | 0 | 1 |
| 18 | 2005 | 22–20 | 52.4% | #45 | 1,636 | 0 | 0 | 1994 | 17–19 | 47.2% | #62 | 1,736 | 0 | 1 |
| 19 | 2006 | 38–20 | 65.5% | #20 | 1,826 | 0 | 3 | 1995 | 18–18 | 50.0% | #45 | 1,718 | 0 | 1 |
| 20 | 2007 | 39–21 | 65.0% | #17 | 1,830 | 0 | 3 | 1996 | 30–21 | 58.8% | #18 | 1,819 | 0 | 1 |
| 21 | 2008 | 24–20 | 54.5% | #38 | 1,707 | 0 | 3 | 1997 | 24–24 | 50.0% | #31 | 1,749 | 0 | 2 |
| 22 | 2009 | 36–21 | 63.2% | #30 | 1,787 | 0 | 5 | 1998 | 35–29 | 54.7% | #26 | 1,829 | 0 | 2 |
| 23 | 2010 | 47–21 | 69.1% | #13 | 1,885 | 0 | 5 | 1999 | 34–29 | 54.0% | #18 | 1,755 | 0 | 2 |
| 24 | 2011 | 23–21 | 52.3% | #37 | 1,706 | 0 | 5 | 2000 | 29–27 | 51.8% | #21 | 1,770 | 0 | 2 |
| 25 | 2012 | 15–22 | 40.5% | #74 | 1,584 | 0 | 5 | 2001 | 25–24 | 51.0% | #36 | 1,746 | 0 | 2 |
| 26 | 2013 | 10–14 | 41.7% | #77 | 1,558 | 0 | 5 | 2002 | 24–27 | 47.1% | #42 | 1,666 | 0 | 2 |
| 27 | 2014 | 10–18 | 35.7% | #117 | 1,539 | 0 | 5 | 2003 | 26–26 | 50.0% | #37 | 1,678 | 0 | 2 |
| 28 | 2015 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #177 | 1,526 | 0 | 5 | 2004 | 26–24 | 52.0% | #24 | 1,828 | 0 | 3 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2005 | 30–22 | 57.7% | #17 | 1,795 | 0 | 3 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2006 | 16–20 | 44.4% | #43 | 1,695 | 0 | 3 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2007 | 13–17 | 43.3% | #62 | 1,665 | 0 | 3 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2008 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #1044 | 1,634 | 0 | 3 |