H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Virginie Razzano vs Anna Smashnova H2H: 1-1
Virginie Razzano and Anna Smashnova are tied 1–1 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Virginie Razzano leads 1–0 on carpet, while Anna Smashnova leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Anna Smashnova won the 2006 Berlin third round 4-6 7-5 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.
FRA
Age 43
Right-Handed
174 cm / 5'9"
H2H
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
ISR
Age 50
Right-Handed
157 cm / 5'2"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 11, 2006* | Berlin | WTA 1000 | R32 | Clay | Anna Smashnova | 4-6 7-5 6-3 | Virginie Razzano | Match data |
| Feb 10, 2005* | Paris | WTA 500 | R32 | Carpet | Virginie Razzano | 6-2 6-3 | Anna Smashnova | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Virginie Razzano | #1,226 | #16 | 2,420 | 1,876 | 200 | 216 | 48.1% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
| Anna Smashnova | #994 | #15 | 1,616 | 1,882 | 242 | 221 | 52.3% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 12 | 12 |
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 | Virginie Razzano | Anna Smashnova | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 14 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1991 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #264 | 1,492 | 0 | 0 |
| 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1992 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #236 | 1,489 | 0 | 0 |
| 16 | 1999 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #344 | 1,483 | 0 | 0 | 1993 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #139 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 2000 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #143 | 1,507 | 0 | 0 | 1994 | 10–11 | 47.6% | #47 | 1,599 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2001 | 10–12 | 45.5% | #87 | 1,589 | 0 | 0 | 1995 | 8–12 | 40.0% | #68 | 1,574 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2002 | 11–12 | 47.8% | #76 | 1,662 | 0 | 0 | 1996 | 4–11 | 26.7% | #132 | 1,560 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2003 | 15–20 | 42.9% | #72 | 1,613 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 21 | 2004 | 7–8 | 46.7% | #60 | 1,604 | 0 | 0 | 1998 | 12–14 | 46.2% | #49 | 1,582 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2005 | 16–22 | 42.1% | #51 | 1,608 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 21–23 | 47.7% | #47 | 1,637 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 2006 | 10–18 | 35.7% | #88 | 1,595 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 25–23 | 52.1% | #46 | 1,668 | 0 | 2 |
| 24 | 2007 | 34–20 | 63.0% | #28 | 1,805 | 0 | 2 | 2001 | 13–19 | 40.6% | #88 | 1,605 | 0 | 2 |
| 25 | 2008 | 14–20 | 41.2% | #58 | 1,633 | 0 | 2 | 2002 | 43–25 | 63.2% | #16 | 1,793 | 0 | 6 |
| 26 | 2009 | 31–20 | 60.8% | #19 | 1,801 | 0 | 2 | 2003 | 37–21 | 63.8% | #16 | 1,857 | 0 | 8 |
| 27 | 2010 | 9–15 | 37.5% | #113 | 1,660 | 0 | 2 | 2004 | 28–23 | 54.9% | #32 | 1,732 | 0 | 9 |
| 28 | 2011 | 13–13 | 50.0% | #83 | 1,681 | 0 | 2 | 2005 | 24–16 | 60.0% | #43 | 1,745 | 0 | 11 |
| 29 | 2012 | 5–9 | 35.7% | #160 | 1,633 | 0 | 2 | 2006 | 16–16 | 50.0% | #63 | 1,700 | 0 | 12 |
| 30 | 2013 | 9–8 | 52.9% | #99 | 1,683 | 0 | 2 | 2007 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #921 | 1,648 | 0 | 12 |
| 31 | 2014 | 4–8 | 33.3% | #165 | 1,621 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 2015 | 4–2 | 66.7% | #200 | 1,657 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 2016 | 5–4 | 55.6% | #169 | 1,647 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |