H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 08:25 UTC
Shahar Peer vs Michaella Krajicek H2H: 1-0
Shahar Peer holds a 1–0 lead over Michaella Krajicek in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Shahar Peer leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Shahar Peer won the 2007 Toronto second round 7-5 7-6(7).
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
NED
Age 37
Right-Handed
177 cm / 5'10"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 13, 2007 | Toronto | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard | Shahar Peer | 7-5 7-6(7) | Michaella Krajicek | Match data |
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 |
| Michaella Krajicek | #1,134 | #30 | 918 | 1,803 | 89 | 98 | 47.6% | 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 | Michaella Krajicek | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 14 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2003 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,489 | 0 | 0 |
| 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2004 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #244 | 1,471 | 0 | 0 |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2005 | 14–8 | 63.6% | #63 | 1,652 | 0 | 1 |
| 17 | 2004 | 3–3 | 50.0% | #176 | 1,509 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 26–16 | 61.9% | #35 | 1,754 | 0 | 3 |
| 18 | 2005 | 22–20 | 52.4% | #45 | 1,636 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 21–25 | 45.7% | #33 | 1,671 | 0 | 3 |
| 19 | 2006 | 38–20 | 65.5% | #20 | 1,826 | 0 | 3 | 2008 | 3–13 | 18.8% | #203 | 1,536 | 0 | 3 |
| 20 | 2007 | 39–21 | 65.0% | #17 | 1,830 | 0 | 3 | 2009 | 4–7 | 36.4% | #128 | 1,536 | 0 | 3 |
| 21 | 2008 | 24–20 | 54.5% | #38 | 1,707 | 0 | 3 | 2010 | 2–5 | 28.6% | #145 | 1,505 | 0 | 3 |
| 22 | 2009 | 36–21 | 63.2% | #30 | 1,787 | 0 | 5 | 2011 | 9–6 | 60.0% | #93 | 1,589 | 0 | 3 |
| 23 | 2010 | 47–21 | 69.1% | #13 | 1,885 | 0 | 5 | 2012 | 7–9 | 43.8% | #167 | 1,562 | 0 | 3 |
| 24 | 2011 | 23–21 | 52.3% | #37 | 1,706 | 0 | 5 | 2013 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #282 | 1,536 | 0 | 3 |
| 25 | 2012 | 15–22 | 40.5% | #74 | 1,584 | 0 | 5 | 2014 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #273 | 1,545 | 0 | 3 |
| 26 | 2013 | 10–14 | 41.7% | #77 | 1,558 | 0 | 5 | 2015 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #178 | 1,549 | 0 | 3 |
| 27 | 2014 | 10–18 | 35.7% | #117 | 1,539 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 2015 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #177 | 1,526 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |