H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 17:48 UTC
Timea Babos vs Johanna Konta H2H: 0-2
Johanna Konta holds a 2–0 lead over Timea Babos in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Johanna Konta leads 2–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Johanna Konta won the 2016 Beijing third round 7-5 5-2.
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
0
–
2
2 main draw meetings
GBR
Age 35
Right-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 5, 2016 | Beijing | WTA 1000 | R32 | Hard | Johanna Konta | 7-5 5-2 | Timea Babos | Match data |
| Aug 29, 2012* | US Open | Grand Slam | R128 | Hard | Johanna Konta | 6-2 7-5 | Timea Babos | 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 |
| Johanna Konta | #113 | #4 | 5,110 | 1,990 | 174 | 120 | 59.2% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 4 |
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 | Johanna Konta | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 2011 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #154 | 1,503 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 2012 | 13–14 | 48.1% | #67 | 1,553 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 2013 | 9–16 | 36.0% | #88 | 1,540 | 0 | 1 | 2011 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #308 | 1,494 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2014 | 4–11 | 26.7% | #99 | 1,482 | 0 | 1 | 2012 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #156 | 1,506 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2015 | 12–21 | 36.4% | #70 | 1,564 | 0 | 1 | 2013 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #114 | 1,505 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2016 | 35–27 | 56.5% | #28 | 1,712 | 0 | 1 | 2014 | 2–8 | 20.0% | #148 | 1,459 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2017 | 20–26 | 43.5% | #57 | 1,637 | 0 | 2 | 2015 | 13–8 | 61.9% | #48 | 1,694 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2018 | 19–23 | 45.2% | #59 | 1,614 | 0 | 3 | 2016 | 42–22 | 65.6% | #10 | 1,854 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2019 | 6–16 | 27.3% | #89 | 1,595 | 0 | 3 | 2017 | 36–17 | 67.9% | #9 | 1,836 | 0 | 3 |
| 27 | 2020 | 0–6 | 0.0% | #115 | 1,542 | 0 | 3 | 2018 | 25–23 | 52.1% | #37 | 1,794 | 0 | 3 |
| 28 | 2021 | 3–9 | 25.0% | #160 | 1,497 | 0 | 3 | 2019 | 33–15 | 68.8% | #12 | 1,925 | 0 | 3 |
| 29 | 2022 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #336 | 1,455 | 0 | 3 | 2020 | 8–9 | 47.1% | #14 | 1,825 | 0 | 3 |
| 30 | 2023 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #188 | 1,480 | 0 | 3 | 2021 | 10–9 | 52.6% | #113 | 1,807 | 0 | 4 |
| 31 | 2024 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #338 | 1,451 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |