H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 17:48 UTC
Sílvia Soler-Espinosa vs Shelby Rogers H2H: 0-1
Shelby Rogers holds a 1–0 lead over Sílvia Soler-Espinosa in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Shelby Rogers leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Shelby Rogers won the 2015 Charleston second round 6-3 6-1.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
ESP
Age 38
Right-Handed
169 cm / 5'7"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
USA
Age 33
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 8, 2015* | Charleston | WTA 500 | R64 | Clay | Shelby Rogers | 6-3 6-1 | Sílvia Soler-Espinosa | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sílvia Soler-Espinosa | #858 | #54 | 1,157 | 1,643 | 56 | 102 | 35.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Shelby Rogers | #437 | #30 | 1,698 | 1,875 | 126 | 138 | 47.7% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
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 | Sílvia Soler-Espinosa | Shelby Rogers | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2010 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #352 | 1,494 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2011 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #426 | 1,479 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2013 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #126 | 1,478 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2009 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #183 | 1,473 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 12–9 | 57.1% | #72 | 1,631 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2010 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #167 | 1,470 | 0 | 0 | 2015 | 4–14 | 22.2% | #151 | 1,528 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2011 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #81 | 1,517 | 0 | 0 | 2016 | 13–13 | 50.0% | #59 | 1,603 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2012 | 13–17 | 43.3% | #83 | 1,581 | 0 | 0 | 2017 | 23–19 | 54.8% | #59 | 1,691 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2013 | 12–20 | 37.5% | #82 | 1,526 | 0 | 0 | 2018 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #630 | 1,652 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2014 | 17–22 | 43.6% | #66 | 1,566 | 0 | 0 | 2019 | 3–9 | 25.0% | #177 | 1,577 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2015 | 3–14 | 17.6% | #145 | 1,490 | 0 | 0 | 2020 | 8–6 | 57.1% | #60 | 1,680 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2016 | 5–6 | 45.5% | #128 | 1,490 | 0 | 0 | 2021 | 28–21 | 57.1% | #40 | 1,802 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2017 | 1–7 | 12.5% | #225 | 1,492 | 0 | 0 | 2022 | 20–19 | 51.3% | #47 | 1,820 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2018 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #190 | 1,543 | 0 | 0 | 2023 | 9–13 | 40.9% | #149 | 1,778 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | 2019 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #681 | 1,547 | 0 | 0 | 2024 | 4–8 | 33.3% | #341 | 1,678 | 0 | 0 |