H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Shahar Peer vs Nicole Vaidisova H2H: 1-1
Shahar Peer and Nicole Vaidisova are tied 1–1 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Nicole Vaidisova leads 1–0 on clay, while Shahar Peer leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Shahar Peer won the 2007 US Open third round 6-4 3-6 7-6(5).
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
CZE
Age 37
Right-Handed
183 cm / 6'0"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 2, 2007* | US Open | Grand Slam | R32 | Hard | Shahar Peer | 6-4 3-6 7-6(5) | Nicole Vaidisova | Match data |
| Apr 13, 2005* | Charleston | WTA 1000 | R64 | Clay | Nicole Vaidisova | 4-6 7-6(8) 6-2 | 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 |
| Nicole Vaidisova | #832 | #7 | 1,981 | 1,997 | 155 | 84 | 64.9% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 6 |
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 | Nicole Vaidisova | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2004 | 14–5 | 73.7% | #75 | 1,674 | 0 | 2 |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2005 | 45–14 | 76.3% | #15 | 1,948 | 0 | 5 |
| 17 | 2004 | 3–3 | 50.0% | #176 | 1,509 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 35–17 | 67.3% | #10 | 1,916 | 0 | 6 |
| 18 | 2005 | 22–20 | 52.4% | #45 | 1,636 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 35–14 | 71.4% | #12 | 1,946 | 0 | 6 |
| 19 | 2006 | 38–20 | 65.5% | #20 | 1,826 | 0 | 3 | 2008 | 17–18 | 48.6% | #41 | 1,711 | 0 | 6 |
| 20 | 2007 | 39–21 | 65.0% | #17 | 1,830 | 0 | 3 | 2009 | 7–12 | 36.8% | #175 | 1,578 | 0 | 6 |
| 21 | 2008 | 24–20 | 54.5% | #38 | 1,707 | 0 | 3 | 2010 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #666 | 1,579 | 0 | 6 |
| 22 | 2009 | 36–21 | 63.2% | #30 | 1,787 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 23 | 2010 | 47–21 | 69.1% | #13 | 1,885 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 24 | 2011 | 23–21 | 52.3% | #37 | 1,706 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 25 | 2012 | 15–22 | 40.5% | #74 | 1,584 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 26 | 2013 | 10–14 | 41.7% | #77 | 1,558 | 0 | 5 | 2015 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #261 | 1,566 | 0 | 6 |
| 27 | 2014 | 10–18 | 35.7% | #117 | 1,539 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 2015 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #177 | 1,526 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |