H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 10:32 UTC
Varvara Lepchenko vs Lilia Osterloh H2H: 0-1
Lilia Osterloh holds a 1–0 lead over Varvara Lepchenko in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Lilia Osterloh leads 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Lilia Osterloh won the 2007 Birmingham second round 7-6(7) 6-3.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
USA
Age 40
Left-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
USA
Age 48
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 13, 2007* | Birmingham | WTA 500 | R64 | Grass | Lilia Osterloh | 7-6(7) 6-3 | Varvara Lepchenko | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Varvara Lepchenko | #172 | #19 | 1,875 | 1,804 | 155 | 220 | 41.3% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Lilia Osterloh | #1,223 | #41 | 738 | 1,697 | 83 | 138 | 37.6% | 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 | Varvara Lepchenko | Lilia Osterloh | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 15 | 2001 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,482 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1996 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #195 | 1,518 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2005 | 2–1 | 66.7% | #132 | 1,510 | 0 | 0 | 1997 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #170 | 1,551 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2006 | 2–6 | 25.0% | #98 | 1,491 | 0 | 0 | 1998 | 0–5 | 0.0% | #120 | 1,501 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2007 | 2–10 | 16.7% | #139 | 1,452 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 9–13 | 40.9% | #79 | 1,545 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2008 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #121 | 1,449 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 15–19 | 44.1% | #43 | 1,595 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2009 | 5–12 | 29.4% | #102 | 1,456 | 0 | 0 | 2001 | 23–25 | 47.9% | #53 | 1,659 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2010 | 4–10 | 28.6% | #74 | 1,469 | 0 | 0 | 2002 | 7–18 | 28.0% | #156 | 1,535 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2011 | 6–12 | 33.3% | #127 | 1,509 | 0 | 0 | 2003 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #180 | 1,509 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2012 | 24–19 | 55.8% | #21 | 1,717 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 4–5 | 44.4% | #119 | 1,561 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2013 | 16–25 | 39.0% | #54 | 1,613 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 2–9 | 18.2% | #144 | 1,488 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2014 | 27–19 | 58.7% | #35 | 1,756 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 6–8 | 42.9% | #118 | 1,509 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2015 | 17–22 | 43.6% | #47 | 1,636 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 7–12 | 36.8% | #91 | 1,543 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2016 | 15–17 | 46.9% | #90 | 1,604 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 3–10 | 23.1% | #230 | 1,486 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | 2017 | 17–21 | 44.7% | #63 | 1,704 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 3–3 | 50.0% | #136 | 1,510 | 0 | 0 |
| 32 | 2018 | 6–13 | 31.6% | #129 | 1,630 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 1–6 | 14.3% | #237 | 1,467 | 0 | 0 |
| 33 | 2019 | 2–11 | 15.4% | #173 | 1,526 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 34 | 2020 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #181 | 1,484 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 35 | 2021 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #127 | 1,584 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 38 | 2024 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #129 | 1,639 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 39 | 2025 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #147 | 1,605 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 40 | 2026 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #172 | 1,558 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |