H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 16:32 UTC
Vera Zvonareva vs Camila Giorgi H2H: 0-1
Camila Giorgi holds a 1–0 lead over Vera Zvonareva in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Camila Giorgi leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Camila Giorgi won the 2015 Dubai second round 6-4 6-2.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
RUS
Age 41
Right-Handed
172 cm / 5'8"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
ITA
Age 34
Right-Handed
168 cm / 5'6"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 18, 2015* | Dubai | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard | Camila Giorgi | 6-4 6-2 | Vera Zvonareva | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vera Zvonareva | #307 | #2 | 7,935 | 2,077 | 459 | 268 | 63.1% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 5 | 6 | 12 |
| Camila Giorgi | #116 | #26 | 1,978 | 1,875 | 204 | 184 | 52.6% | 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 | Vera Zvonareva | Camila Giorgi | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 15 | 2000 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #349 | 1,512 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 2002 | 19–11 | 63.3% | #45 | 1,680 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 2003 | 45–22 | 67.2% | #13 | 1,849 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 2004 | 54–27 | 66.7% | #11 | 1,935 | 0 | 2 | 2011 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #151 | 1,486 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2005 | 21–21 | 50.0% | #42 | 1,683 | 0 | 3 | 2012 | 6–10 | 37.5% | #75 | 1,524 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2006 | 37–22 | 62.7% | #24 | 1,884 | 0 | 5 | 2013 | 8–11 | 42.1% | #98 | 1,579 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2007 | 30–14 | 68.2% | #22 | 1,935 | 0 | 5 | 2014 | 27–19 | 58.7% | #34 | 1,710 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2008 | 58–22 | 72.5% | #7 | 2,005 | 0 | 7 | 2015 | 26–21 | 55.3% | #35 | 1,730 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 2009 | 34–14 | 70.8% | #9 | 1,916 | 0 | 9 | 2016 | 14–19 | 42.4% | #82 | 1,638 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 2010 | 49–18 | 73.1% | #2 | 2,051 | 0 | 10 | 2017 | 15–12 | 55.6% | #78 | 1,778 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2011 | 54–22 | 71.1% | #7 | 1,946 | 0 | 12 | 2018 | 28–15 | 65.1% | #26 | 1,865 | 0 | 2 |
| 27 | 2012 | 9–9 | 50.0% | #95 | 1,808 | 0 | 12 | 2019 | 12–15 | 44.4% | #100 | 1,725 | 0 | 2 |
| 28 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2020 | 10–9 | 52.6% | #76 | 1,726 | 0 | 2 |
| 29 | 2014 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #251 | 1,743 | 0 | 12 | 2021 | 21–16 | 56.8% | #33 | 1,799 | 0 | 3 |
| 30 | 2015 | 7–8 | 46.7% | #185 | 1,671 | 0 | 12 | 2022 | 14–16 | 46.7% | #66 | 1,763 | 0 | 3 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2023 | 20–15 | 57.1% | #53 | 1,788 | 0 | 4 |
| 32 | 2017 | 3–1 | 75.0% | #200 | 1,676 | 0 | 12 | 2024 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #116 | 1,760 | 0 | 4 |
| 33 | 2018 | 6–9 | 40.0% | #109 | 1,702 | 0 | 12 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 34 | 2019 | 6–7 | 46.2% | #159 | 1,680 | 0 | 12 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 35 | 2020 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #164 | 1,731 | 0 | 12 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 36 | 2021 | 11–11 | 50.0% | #81 | 1,753 | 0 | 12 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 37 | 2022 | 3–8 | 27.3% | #357 | 1,711 | 0 | 12 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 38 | 2023 | 4–8 | 33.3% | #272 | 1,683 | 0 | 12 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 41 | 2026 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #307 | 1,646 | 0 | 12 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |