H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Timea Babos vs Dominika Cibulkova H2H: 1-0
Timea Babos holds a 1–0 lead over Dominika Cibulkova in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Timea Babos leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Timea Babos won the 2016 Cincinnati fourth round 4-6 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.
HUN
Age 33
Right-Handed
179 cm / 5'10"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
SVK
Age 37
Right-Handed
161 cm / 5'3"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 19, 2016* | Cincinnati | WTA 1000 | R16 | Hard | Timea Babos | 4-6 6-3 6-1 | Dominika Cibulkova | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Timea Babos | #453 | #25 | 1,675 | 1,768 | 123 | 177 | 41.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
| Dominika Cibulkova | #315 | #4 | 5,245 | 1,966 | 365 | 261 | 58.3% | 0 | 0 | 1 | 5 | 2 | 8 |
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 | Timea Babos | Dominika Cibulkova | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 2010 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #268 | 1,491 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #153 | 1,506 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2011 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #154 | 1,503 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 17–17 | 50.0% | #51 | 1,605 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2012 | 13–14 | 48.1% | #67 | 1,553 | 0 | 1 | 2008 | 34–25 | 57.6% | #19 | 1,840 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2013 | 9–16 | 36.0% | #88 | 1,540 | 0 | 1 | 2009 | 20–17 | 54.1% | #28 | 1,733 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2014 | 4–11 | 26.7% | #99 | 1,482 | 0 | 1 | 2010 | 30–24 | 55.6% | #31 | 1,753 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2015 | 12–21 | 36.4% | #70 | 1,564 | 0 | 1 | 2011 | 41–21 | 66.1% | #18 | 1,893 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 2016 | 35–27 | 56.5% | #28 | 1,712 | 0 | 1 | 2012 | 34–25 | 57.6% | #15 | 1,810 | 0 | 2 |
| 24 | 2017 | 20–26 | 43.5% | #57 | 1,637 | 0 | 2 | 2013 | 27–23 | 54.0% | #23 | 1,738 | 0 | 3 |
| 25 | 2018 | 19–23 | 45.2% | #59 | 1,614 | 0 | 3 | 2014 | 33–22 | 60.0% | #10 | 1,721 | 0 | 4 |
| 26 | 2019 | 6–16 | 27.3% | #89 | 1,595 | 0 | 3 | 2015 | 19–16 | 54.3% | #38 | 1,757 | 0 | 4 |
| 27 | 2020 | 0–6 | 0.0% | #115 | 1,542 | 0 | 3 | 2016 | 53–21 | 71.6% | #5 | 1,951 | 0 | 8 |
| 28 | 2021 | 3–9 | 25.0% | #160 | 1,497 | 0 | 3 | 2017 | 26–22 | 54.2% | #26 | 1,778 | 0 | 8 |
| 29 | 2022 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #336 | 1,455 | 0 | 3 | 2018 | 27–18 | 60.0% | #25 | 1,865 | 0 | 8 |
| 30 | 2023 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #188 | 1,480 | 0 | 3 | 2019 | 2–8 | 20.0% | #315 | 1,764 | 0 | 8 |
| 31 | 2024 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #338 | 1,451 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |