H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 22:30 UTC
Zarina Diyas vs Maria Kirilenko H2H: 0-1
Maria Kirilenko holds a 1–0 lead over Zarina Diyas in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Maria Kirilenko leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Maria Kirilenko won the 2010 Moscow quarterfinal 6-1 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.
KAZ
Age 32
Right-Handed
172 cm / 5'8"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
RUS
Age 39
Right-Handed
174 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 23, 2010* | Moscow | WTA 500 | QF | Hard | Maria Kirilenko | 6-1 6-2 | Zarina Diyas | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Zarina Diyas | #437 | #31 | 1,495 | 1,751 | 99 | 127 | 43.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Maria Kirilenko | #947 | #10 | 3,471 | 1,910 | 282 | 228 | 55.3% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 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 | Zarina Diyas | Maria Kirilenko | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 15 | 2009 | 2–1 | 66.7% | #242 | 1,527 | 0 | 0 | 2002 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #373 | 1,479 | 0 | 0 |
| 16 | 2010 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #172 | 1,539 | 0 | 0 | 2003 | 5–5 | 50.0% | #124 | 1,522 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 2011 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #227 | 1,503 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 8–9 | 47.1% | #107 | 1,575 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2012 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #264 | 1,476 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 29–21 | 58.0% | #25 | 1,741 | 0 | 1 |
| 19 | 2013 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #163 | 1,477 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 23–25 | 47.9% | #30 | 1,656 | 0 | 1 |
| 20 | 2014 | 20–14 | 58.8% | #33 | 1,683 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 28–26 | 51.9% | #25 | 1,739 | 0 | 2 |
| 21 | 2015 | 20–27 | 42.6% | #52 | 1,576 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 34–22 | 60.7% | #29 | 1,722 | 0 | 5 |
| 22 | 2016 | 8–12 | 40.0% | #150 | 1,558 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 21–24 | 46.7% | #62 | 1,719 | 0 | 5 |
| 23 | 2017 | 7–4 | 63.6% | #66 | 1,667 | 0 | 1 | 2010 | 37–23 | 61.7% | #20 | 1,827 | 0 | 5 |
| 24 | 2018 | 13–19 | 40.6% | #89 | 1,718 | 0 | 1 | 2011 | 29–23 | 55.8% | #28 | 1,816 | 0 | 5 |
| 25 | 2019 | 7–14 | 33.3% | #77 | 1,697 | 0 | 1 | 2012 | 29–20 | 59.2% | #14 | 1,775 | 0 | 5 |
| 26 | 2020 | 5–6 | 45.5% | #80 | 1,655 | 0 | 1 | 2013 | 34–18 | 65.4% | #19 | 1,786 | 0 | 6 |
| 27 | 2021 | 13–16 | 44.8% | #102 | 1,688 | 0 | 1 | 2014 | 5–9 | 35.7% | #187 | 1,698 | 0 | 6 |
| 28 | 2022 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #1031 | 1,680 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 2024 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #382 | 1,632 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |