H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Virginie Razzano vs Melinda Czink H2H: 1-2
Melinda Czink holds a 2–1 lead over Virginie Razzano in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Melinda Czink leads 2–0 on hard courts, while Virginie Razzano leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Melinda Czink won the 2008 Los Angeles second round 6-3 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
–
2
3 main draw meetings
HUN
Age 43
Left-Handed
178 cm / 5'10"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 23, 2008* | Los Angeles | WTA 500 | R64 | Hard | Melinda Czink | 6-3 6-3 | Virginie Razzano | Match data |
| Jun 15, 2007* | Barcelona | WTA 250 | R16 | Clay | Virginie Razzano | 7-6(5) 3-6 6-2 | Melinda Czink | Match data |
| Jan 13, 2006* | Canberra | WTA 250 | R16 | Hard | Melinda Czink | 5-7 7-5 6-3 | Virginie Razzano | 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 |
| Melinda Czink | #691 | #37 | 1,571 | 1,794 | 89 | 136 | 39.6% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
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 | Melinda Czink | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | 1999 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #344 | 1,483 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 2000 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #143 | 1,507 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 2001 | 10–12 | 45.5% | #87 | 1,589 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 2002 | 11–12 | 47.8% | #76 | 1,662 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 2003 | 15–20 | 42.9% | #72 | 1,613 | 0 | 0 | 2003 | 4–3 | 57.1% | #79 | 1,568 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2004 | 7–8 | 46.7% | #60 | 1,604 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 2–15 | 11.8% | #128 | 1,427 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2005 | 16–22 | 42.1% | #51 | 1,608 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 9–12 | 42.9% | #96 | 1,478 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2006 | 10–18 | 35.7% | #88 | 1,595 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 14–18 | 43.8% | #105 | 1,500 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2007 | 34–20 | 63.0% | #28 | 1,805 | 0 | 2 | 2007 | 3–9 | 25.0% | #124 | 1,456 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2008 | 14–20 | 41.2% | #58 | 1,633 | 0 | 2 | 2008 | 10–11 | 47.6% | #106 | 1,558 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2009 | 31–20 | 60.8% | #19 | 1,801 | 0 | 2 | 2009 | 29–21 | 58.0% | #37 | 1,741 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2010 | 9–15 | 37.5% | #113 | 1,660 | 0 | 2 | 2010 | 3–16 | 15.8% | #312 | 1,524 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2011 | 13–13 | 50.0% | #83 | 1,681 | 0 | 2 | 2011 | 3–6 | 33.3% | #143 | 1,519 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 2012 | 5–9 | 35.7% | #160 | 1,633 | 0 | 2 | 2012 | 9–16 | 36.0% | #94 | 1,543 | 0 | 1 |
| 30 | 2013 | 9–8 | 52.9% | #99 | 1,683 | 0 | 2 | 2013 | 3–9 | 25.0% | #254 | 1,499 | 0 | 1 |
| 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 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |