H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 04:32 UTC

Venus Williams vs Meghann Shaughnessy H2H: 5-2

Venus Williams holds a 5–2 lead over Meghann Shaughnessy in their WTA head-to-head. Across 7 main-draw meetings, Venus Williams leads 4–2 on hard courts and 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Meghann Shaughnessy won the 2003 Miami fourth round 7-6(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
5 – 2
7 main draw meetings
Meghann Shaughnessy
USA Age 47 Right-Handed 180 cm / 5'11"

H2H Match Log

DateTournamentCategoryRoundSurfaceWinnerScoreLoserMatch
Mar 23, 2003* Miami WTA 1000 R16 Hard Meghann Shaughnessy #22 7-6(2) 6-1 Venus Williams #2 Match data
Aug 23, 2002* New Haven WTA 500 R16 Hard Venus Williams #2 6-2 6-4 Meghann Shaughnessy #31 Match data
Jul 26, 2002* Stanford WTA 500 R16 Hard Venus Williams #2 6-4 6-1 Meghann Shaughnessy #19 Match data
Jul 28, 2001* Stanford WTA 500 QF Hard Meghann Shaughnessy #15 2-6 7-5 7-6(4) Venus Williams #2 Match data
May 6, 2001* Hamburg WTA 500 F Clay Venus Williams #2 6-3 6-0 Meghann Shaughnessy #25 Match data
Jan 19, 2001* Australian Open Grand Slam R64 Hard Venus Williams #3 6-3 7-6(3) Meghann Shaughnessy #31 Match data
Aug 22, 2000 US Open Grand Slam R32 Hard Venus Williams #3 7-6 6-1 Meghann Shaughnessy #51 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
Meghann Shaughnessy #1,104 #11 1,949 1,888 233 233 50.0% 0 0 0 0 6 6

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 Meghann Shaughnessy
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 — — — — — — —
17 1997 20–13 60.6% #22 1,851 0 0 1996 3–4 42.9% #165 1,512 0 0
18 1998 50–13 79.4% #5 2,094 0 2 1997 0–1 0.0% #198 1,499 0 0
19 1999 57–11 83.8% #3 2,258 0 8 1998 8–9 47.1% #69 1,544 0 0
20 2000 35–4 89.7% #3 2,321 2 13 1999 10–22 31.2% #99 1,439 0 0
21 2001 46–6 88.5% #3 2,338 4 19 2000 23–20 53.5% #38 1,652 0 1
22 2002 63–9 87.5% #2 2,297 4 26 2001 45–25 64.3% #12 1,825 0 2
23 2003 24–5 82.8% #11 2,257 4 27 2002 29–27 51.8% #30 1,716 0 2
24 2004 40–13 75.5% #9 2,072 4 29 2003 32–23 58.2% #17 1,725 0 3
25 2005 34–10 77.3% #10 2,085 5 31 2004 20–22 47.6% #40 1,663 0 3
26 2006 13–6 68.4% #46 2,007 5 31 2005 17–25 40.5% #66 1,563 0 3
27 2007 46–10 82.1% #8 2,048 6 34 2006 27–20 57.4% #37 1,709 0 5
28 2008 37–10 78.7% #6 2,133 7 37 2007 18–22 45.0% #52 1,666 0 6
29 2009 38–16 70.4% #6 1,981 7 39 2008 0–5 0.0% #836 1,579 0 6
30 2010 38–7 84.4% #5 2,057 7 41 2009 1–8 11.1% #590 1,533 0 6
31 2011 8–4 66.7% #102 1,994 7 41 — — — — — — —
32 2012 22–8 73.3% #24 2,007 7 42 — — — — — — —
33 2013 15–11 57.7% #47 1,889 7 42 — — — — — — —
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 — — — — — — —