H2H data updated: 2026-08-08 02:15 UTC
Tamira Paszek vs Julia Schruff H2H: 2-0
Tamira Paszek holds a 2–0 lead over Julia Schruff in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Tamira Paszek leads 1–0 on clay and 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Tamira Paszek won the 2009 Charleston second round 7-5 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.
AUT
Age 35
Right-Handed
165 cm / 5'5"
H2H
2
–
0
2 main draw meetings
GER
Age 43
Right-Handed
166 cm / 5'5"
H2H Match Log
| Winner | Score | Loser | Match Data | Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tamira Paszek | 7-5 6-2 | Julia Schruff | Match data | Apr 15, 2009* | Charleston | WTA 500 | R64 | Clay |
| Tamira Paszek | 4-6 6-2 6-2 | Julia Schruff | Match data | Mar 12, 2008* | Indian Wells | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard |
* 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tamira Paszek | #446 | #299 | 230 | 1,782 | 100 | 129 | 43.7% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
| Julia Schruff | #1,200 | #52 | 536 | 1,663 | 48 | 80 | 37.5% | 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 | Tamira Paszek | Julia Schruff | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 14 | 2005 | 1–1 | 50.0% | — | 1,512 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 15 | 2006 | 6–2 | 75.0% | — | 1,599 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 16 | 2007 | 15–14 | 51.7% | — | 1,730 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 2008 | 16–18 | 47.1% | — | 1,697 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 2009 | 5–9 | 35.7% | — | 1,626 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 2010 | 9–9 | 50.0% | — | 1,642 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 2011 | 19–21 | 47.5% | — | 1,654 | 0 | 2 | 2003 | 4–5 | 44.4% | #117 | 1,508 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2012 | 18–21 | 46.2% | — | 1,676 | 0 | 3 | 2004 | 5–12 | 29.4% | #108 | 1,480 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2013 | 2–17 | 10.5% | — | 1,476 | 0 | 3 | 2005 | 9–13 | 40.9% | #81 | 1,565 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2014 | 1–4 | 20.0% | — | 1,469 | 0 | 3 | 2006 | 18–24 | 42.9% | #82 | 1,503 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2015 | 1–4 | 20.0% | — | 1,442 | 0 | 3 | 2007 | 6–13 | 31.6% | #119 | 1,464 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2016 | 7–9 | 43.8% | — | 1,519 | 0 | 3 | 2008 | 5–7 | 41.7% | #132 | 1,483 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2009 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #131 | 1,473 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2010 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #173 | 1,451 | 0 | 0 |