H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 04:32 UTC

Venus Williams vs Conchita Martínez H2H: 3-0

Venus Williams holds a 3–0 lead over Conchita Martínez in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Venus Williams leads 1–0 on carpet and 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Venus Williams won the 2004 Charleston final 2-6 6-2 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.

Venus Williams
USA Age 46 Right-Handed 185 cm / 6'1"
H2H
3 – 0
3 main draw meetings
Conchita Martínez
ESP Age 54 Right-Handed 170 cm / 5'7"

H2H Match Log

DateTournamentCategoryRoundSurfaceWinnerScoreLoserMatch
Apr 18, 2004* Charleston WTA 1000 F Clay Venus Williams #16 2-6 6-2 6-1 Conchita Martínez #24 Match data
Aug 5, 2000* San Diego WTA 500 QF Hard Venus Williams #3 6-3 6-0 Conchita Martínez #6 Match data
Nov 15, 1999 WTA Tour Championships WTA Finals R16 Carpet Venus Williams #3 6-2 5-7 6-4 Conchita Martínez #15 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
Venus Williams #467 #1 7,452 2,362 768 288 72.7% 7 9 1 20 10 47
Conchita Martínez #1,498 #2 3,180 2,263 669 275 70.9% 1 9 0 4 19 33

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 Venus Williams Conchita Martínez
YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles
14 1994 1–1 50.0% — 1,525 0 0 — — — — — — —
15 1995 2–3 40.0% #205 1,561 0 0 — — — — — — —
16 1996 2–5 28.6% #216 1,571 0 0 1988 14–6 70.0% #41 1,730 0 1
17 1997 20–13 60.6% #22 1,851 0 0 1989 35–9 79.5% #7 1,933 0 4
18 1998 50–13 79.4% #5 2,094 0 2 1990 38–10 79.2% #11 2,063 0 7
19 1999 57–11 83.8% #3 2,258 0 8 1991 36–12 75.0% #9 2,076 0 10
20 2000 35–4 89.7% #3 2,321 2 13 1992 44–16 73.3% #8 2,054 0 11
21 2001 46–6 88.5% #3 2,338 4 19 1993 66–13 83.5% #4 2,158 0 16
22 2002 63–9 87.5% #2 2,297 4 26 1994 51–14 78.5% #3 2,065 1 20
23 2003 24–5 82.8% #11 2,257 4 27 1995 57–10 85.1% #2 2,182 1 26
24 2004 40–13 75.5% #9 2,072 4 29 1996 44–16 73.3% #4 2,074 1 28
25 2005 34–10 77.3% #10 2,085 5 31 1997 37–19 66.1% #12 2,011 1 28
26 2006 13–6 68.4% #46 2,007 5 31 1998 38–16 70.4% #8 1,968 1 30
27 2007 46–10 82.1% #8 2,048 6 34 1999 38–22 63.3% #15 1,898 1 31
28 2008 37–10 78.7% #6 2,133 7 37 2000 48–19 71.6% #5 1,951 1 32
29 2009 38–16 70.4% #6 1,981 7 39 2001 19–13 59.4% #35 1,852 1 32
30 2010 38–7 84.4% #5 2,057 7 41 2002 26–24 52.0% #34 1,756 1 32
31 2011 8–4 66.7% #102 1,994 7 41 2003 29–21 58.0% #18 1,756 1 32
32 2012 22–8 73.3% #24 2,007 7 42 2004 20–16 55.6% #42 1,772 1 32
33 2013 15–11 57.7% #47 1,889 7 42 2005 29–19 60.4% #31 1,812 1 33
34 2014 33–15 68.8% #18 1,874 7 43 — — — — — — —
35 2015 39–14 73.6% #7 1,957 7 46 — — — — — — —
36 2016 24–14 63.2% #17 1,830 7 47 — — — — — — —
37 2017 38–15 71.7% #5 1,935 7 47 — — — — — — —
38 2018 15–11 57.7% #39 1,867 7 47 — — — — — — —
39 2019 20–15 57.1% #52 1,827 7 47 — — — — — — —
40 2020 1–8 11.1% #79 1,717 7 47 — — — — — — —
41 2021 3–9 25.0% #318 1,649 7 47 — — — — — — —
42 2022 0–4 0.0% #1000 1,603 7 47 — — — — — — —
43 2023 3–7 30.0% #412 1,594 7 47 — — — — — — —