H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Shahar Peer vs Mara Santangelo H2H: 2-0
Shahar Peer holds a 2–0 lead over Mara Santangelo in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Shahar Peer leads 1–0 on clay and 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Shahar Peer won the 2006 Istanbul quarterfinal 6-1 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
2
–
0
2 main draw meetings
ITA
Age 45
Right-Handed
183 cm / 6'0"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 27, 2006* | Istanbul | WTA 500 | QF | Clay | Shahar Peer | 6-1 6-2 | Mara Santangelo | Match data |
| Jan 7, 2005* | Auckland | WTA 250 | R16 | Hard | Shahar Peer | 6-3 4-6 6-2 | Mara Santangelo | 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 |
| Mara Santangelo | #970 | #27 | 918 | 1,824 | 74 | 93 | 44.3% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
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 | Mara Santangelo | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 2005 | 22–20 | 52.4% | #45 | 1,636 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 2006 | 38–20 | 65.5% | #20 | 1,826 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 2007 | 39–21 | 65.0% | #17 | 1,830 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 21 | 2008 | 24–20 | 54.5% | #38 | 1,707 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 22 | 2009 | 36–21 | 63.2% | #30 | 1,787 | 0 | 5 | 2003 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #138 | 1,475 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2010 | 47–21 | 69.1% | #13 | 1,885 | 0 | 5 | 2004 | 8–14 | 36.4% | #86 | 1,489 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2011 | 23–21 | 52.3% | #37 | 1,706 | 0 | 5 | 2005 | 6–13 | 31.6% | #88 | 1,476 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2012 | 15–22 | 40.5% | #74 | 1,584 | 0 | 5 | 2006 | 29–25 | 53.7% | #31 | 1,672 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2013 | 10–14 | 41.7% | #77 | 1,558 | 0 | 5 | 2007 | 27–21 | 56.2% | #35 | 1,749 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2014 | 10–18 | 35.7% | #117 | 1,539 | 0 | 5 | 2008 | 2–9 | 18.2% | #134 | 1,614 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2015 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #177 | 1,526 | 0 | 5 | 2009 | 2–9 | 18.2% | #342 | 1,548 | 0 | 1 |