H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Viktoriya Tomova vs Maryna Zanevska H2H: 0-1
Maryna Zanevska holds a 1–0 lead over Viktoriya Tomova in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Maryna Zanevska leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Maryna Zanevska won the 2022 Hamburg third round 4-6 6-4 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.
BUL
Age 31
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
BEL
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 11, 2023 | Doha | WTA 1000 | Q1 | Hard | Viktoriya Tomova | 7-5 (ret.) | Maryna Zanevska | Match data |
| Jul 20, 2022* | Hamburg | WTA 250 | R32 | Clay | Maryna Zanevska | 4-6 6-4 6-3 | Viktoriya Tomova | Match data |
| Oct 8, 2017 | Linz | WTA 500 | Q2 | Clay | Viktoriya Tomova | 5-7 6-3 6-2 | Maryna Zanevska | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Viktoriya Tomova | #207 | #46 | 1,235 | 1,760 | 54 | 106 | 33.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Maryna Zanevska | #1,162 | #62 | 1,015 | 1,797 | 34 | 53 | 39.1% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
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.
| Viktoriya Tomova | Maryna Zanevska | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles |
| 2017 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #145 | 1,509 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #118 | 1,476 | 0 | 0 |
| 2018 | 3–6 | 33.3% | #156 | 1,499 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 1–6 | 14.3% | #128 | 1,440 | 0 | 0 |
| 2019 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #148 | 1,546 | 0 | 0 | 2015 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #143 | 1,454 | 0 | 0 |
| 2020 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #139 | 1,525 | 0 | 0 | 2016 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #122 | 1,470 | 0 | 0 |
| 2021 | 6–11 | 35.3% | #117 | 1,441 | 0 | 0 | 2017 | 0–8 | 0.0% | #167 | 1,418 | 0 | 0 |
| 2022 | 6–11 | 35.3% | #90 | 1,602 | 0 | 0 | 2018 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #217 | 1,464 | 0 | 0 |
| 2023 | 4–18 | 18.2% | #80 | 1,629 | 0 | 0 | 2021 | 9–2 | 81.8% | #82 | 1,671 | 0 | 1 |
| 2024 | 21–26 | 44.7% | #53 | 1,709 | 0 | 0 | 2022 | 15–14 | 51.7% | #81 | 1,758 | 0 | 2 |
| 2025 | 9–19 | 32.1% | #131 | 1,656 | 0 | 0 | 2023 | 5–12 | 29.4% | #251 | 1,602 | 0 | 2 |
| 2026 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #207 | 1,569 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |