H2H data updated: 2026-09-01 00:00 UTC

Amy Frazier vs Emilie Loit H2H: 0-1

Emilie Loit holds a 1–0 lead over Amy Frazier in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Emilie Loit leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Emilie Loit won the 2005 Roland Garros second round 6-4 6-4.

Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.

Amy Frazier
USA Age 53 Right-Handed 175 cm / 5'9"
H2H
0 – 1
1 main draw meetings
Emilie Loit
FRA Age 47 Left-Handed 167 cm / 5'6"

H2H Match Log

PlayerScorePlayerMatch DataDateRoundTournamentCategorySurface
Emilie Loit #92 6-4 6-4 Amy Frazier #37 Match data May 26, 2005* R64 Roland Garros Grand Slam Clay

Estimated match date where the exact historical date is unavailable. Arrows show an edition's recorded category and documented modern equivalent; unresolved editions keep their recorded category. Asterisked totals include editions mapped from documented historical predecessor categories. Mapping details.

Career Comparison

Player Current Peak Pts Elo W L Win % GS 1000 including documented historical predecessor categories Finals 500 including documented historical predecessor categories 250 including documented historical predecessor categories Titles
Amy Frazier #450 #13 1,381 1,956 416 307 57.5% 0 0 0 1 7 8
Emilie Loit #161 #27 1,016 1,779 162 180 47.4% 0 0 0 0 3 3

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 Amy Frazier Emilie Loit
YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles
14 1987 3–4 42.9% #147 1,527 0 0 — — — — — — —
15 1988 12–15 44.4% #58 1,636 0 0 — — — — — — —
16 1989 23–15 60.5% #33 1,717 0 1 — — — — — — —
17 1990 31–14 68.9% #16 1,891 0 2 — — — — — — —
18 1991 25–18 58.1% #28 1,812 0 2 1997 0–1 0.0% #243 1,498 0 0
19 1992 33–17 66.0% #19 1,843 0 3 1998 3–5 37.5% #96 1,512 0 0
20 1993 10–9 52.6% #39 1,844 0 3 1999 3–15 16.7% #101 1,424 0 0
21 1994 28–15 65.1% #16 1,903 0 4 2000 4–6 40.0% #101 1,457 0 0
22 1995 26–15 63.4% #18 1,876 0 5 2001 12–15 44.4% #95 1,547 0 0
23 1996 20–16 55.6% #33 1,836 0 5 2002 19–17 52.8% #58 1,625 0 0
24 1997 17–17 50.0% #37 1,819 0 5 2003 23–24 48.9% #41 1,673 0 0
25 1998 12–13 48.0% #42 1,766 0 5 2004 29–20 59.2% #45 1,668 0 2
26 1999 31–19 62.0% #19 1,877 0 6 2005 15–20 42.9% #82 1,548 0 2
27 2000 30–22 57.7% #20 1,853 0 6 2006 20–16 55.6% #56 1,622 0 2
28 2001 19–19 50.0% #48 1,696 0 6 2007 26–22 54.2% #43 1,618 0 3
29 2002 19–18 51.4% #39 1,757 0 6 2008 5–15 25.0% #137 1,518 0 3
30 2003 14–13 51.9% #61 1,726 0 6 2009 3–4 42.9% #161 1,533 0 3
31 2004 35–17 67.3% #26 1,825 0 7 — — — — — — —
32 2005 18–16 52.9% #52 1,729 0 8 — — — — — — —
33 2006 10–15 40.0% #130 1,626 0 8 — — — — — — —

Surface Results by Age

Seasons are aligned by the age each player spent most of that calendar year. Results cover completed main-draw matches. Bold green marks the higher win percentage when both players have at least 5 matches on that surface at the aligned age.

Age Amy Frazier Emilie Loit
Yr HardClayGrassCarpet Yr HardClayGrassCarpet
W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win %
14 1987 0 2 2 0.0% 3 2 5 60.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
15 1988 9 10 19 47.4% 1 2 3 33.3% 1 2 3 33.3% 1 1 2 50.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
16 1989 21 9 30 70.0% 1 2 3 33.3% 1 2 3 33.3% 0 2 2 0.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
17 1990 21 9 30 70.0% — — — — 3 2 5 60.0% 7 3 10 70.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
18 1991 17 12 29 58.6% — — — — 3 2 5 60.0% 5 4 9 55.6% 1997 — — — — 0 1 1 0.0% — — — — — — — —
19 1992 22 10 32 68.8% 5 1 6 83.3% 3 2 5 60.0% 3 4 7 42.9% 1998 1 1 2 50.0% 1 3 4 25.0% — — — — 1 1 2 50.0%
20 1993 6 5 11 54.5% — — — — — — — — 4 4 8 50.0% 1999 3 6 9 33.3% 0 5 5 0.0% 0 2 2 0.0% 0 2 2 0.0%
21 1994 23 8 31 74.2% 2 2 4 50.0% 0 2 2 0.0% 3 3 6 50.0% 2000 2 3 5 40.0% 2 3 5 40.0% — — — — — — — —
22 1995 19 9 28 67.9% 2 2 4 50.0% 1 1 2 50.0% 4 3 7 57.1% 2001 4 6 10 40.0% 7 6 13 53.8% 1 1 2 50.0% 0 2 2 0.0%
23 1996 13 8 21 61.9% 0 2 2 0.0% 3 2 5 60.0% 4 4 8 50.0% 2002 6 7 13 46.2% 12 8 20 60.0% 1 1 2 50.0% 0 1 1 0.0%
24 1997 11 10 21 52.4% 2 2 4 50.0% 1 2 3 33.3% 3 3 6 50.0% 2003 10 11 21 47.6% 10 8 18 55.6% 2 3 5 40.0% 1 2 3 33.3%
25 1998 10 10 20 50.0% — — — — 0 1 1 0.0% 2 2 4 50.0% 2004 6 11 17 35.3% 19 5 24 79.2% 4 3 7 57.1% 0 1 1 0.0%
26 1999 25 14 39 64.1% 4 2 6 66.7% 0 2 2 0.0% 2 1 3 66.7% 2005 4 9 13 30.8% 11 9 20 55.0% 0 1 1 0.0% 0 1 1 0.0%
27 2000 25 13 38 65.8% 1 4 5 20.0% 2 2 4 50.0% 2 3 5 40.0% 2006 5 8 13 38.5% 13 6 19 68.4% 0 1 1 0.0% 2 1 3 66.7%
28 2001 10 10 20 50.0% 5 4 9 55.6% 2 2 4 50.0% 2 3 5 40.0% 2007 9 11 20 45.0% 15 9 24 62.5% 1 1 2 50.0% 1 1 2 50.0%
29 2002 14 12 26 53.8% 3 4 7 42.9% 2 2 4 50.0% — — — — 2008 1 7 8 12.5% 3 6 9 33.3% 1 1 2 50.0% 0 1 1 0.0%
30 2003 11 8 19 57.9% 1 3 4 25.0% 2 2 4 50.0% — — — — 2009 — — — — 1 3 4 25.0% — — — — 2 1 3 66.7%
31 2004 27 11 38 71.1% 5 4 9 55.6% 3 2 5 60.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
32 2005 14 10 24 58.3% 3 4 7 42.9% 1 2 3 33.3% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
33 2006 8 10 18 44.4% 0 4 4 0.0% 2 1 3 66.7% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Career — 306 190 496 61.7% 38 44 82 46.3% 30 33 63 47.6% 42 40 82 51.2% — 51 80 131 38.9% 94 72 166 56.6% 10 14 24 41.7% 7 14 21 33.3%

Performance Progression by Age

Seasons are aligned by the age each player spent most of that calendar year. Detailed serve and return statistics available for 34/138 of Amy Frazier's and 84/242 of Emilie Loit's main draw matches. Sample is shown as matches with detailed serve and return statistics / total main draw matches. Bold green marks the stronger value when both stat samples contain at least 5 matches; lower is better for DFs/M.

Age Amy Frazier Emilie Loit
Yr Sample Aces/M DFs/M 1st Sv% 1st Pts% 2nd Pts% BP Saved% BP Conv% Svc Pts% Ret Pts% Yr Sample Aces/M DFs/M 1st Sv% 1st Pts% 2nd Pts% BP Saved% BP Conv% Svc Pts% Ret Pts%
24 — —/— — — — — — — — — — 2003 8/47 1.3 2.4 62.2% 65.0% 52.9% 56.7% 36.8% 60.6% 43.0%
25 — —/— — — — — — — — — — 2004 4/49 1.5 3.0 58.5% 60.4% 45.6% 43.3% 45.3% 54.9% 39.2%
26 — —/— — — — — — — — — — 2005 5/35 1.4 3.0 52.1% 67.1% 43.2% 51.3% 48.2% 56.1% 48.6%
27 — —/— — — — — — — — — — 2006 15/36 2.3 2.4 63.3% 58.3% 46.8% 55.7% 48.5% 54.0% 45.5%
28 — —/— — — — — — — — — — 2007 31/48 1.8 3.0 64.1% 60.0% 45.7% 50.1% 49.0% 54.5% 45.5%
29 — —/— — — — — — — — — — 2008 15/20 2.0 2.9 66.4% 55.8% 37.9% 40.8% 41.0% 49.6% 39.2%
30 2003 4/27 1.0 7.0 57.0% 59.8% 36.6% 49.3% 62.5% 49.5% 44.1% 2009 6/7 2.7 3.5 62.6% 63.4% 43.1% 51.0% 60.7% 55.4% 40.8%
31 2004 9/52 1.4 8.3 61.0% 61.2% 46.0% 41.9% 48.0% 55.3% 48.1% — —/— — — — — — — — — —
32 2005 6/34 0.8 7.2 60.1% 58.3% 35.6% 43.8% 42.1% 49.2% 47.8% — —/— — — — — — — — — —
33 2006 15/25 1.3 6.9 55.9% 60.7% 44.1% 51.4% 50.8% 53.1% 41.9% — —/— — — — — — — — — —
Career — 34/723 1.2 7.3 58.1% 60.3% 42.2% 47.3% 49.9% 52.6% 44.8% — 84/342 1.9 2.9 63.1% 60.1% 44.8% 49.9% 46.9% 54.3% 43.7%

Advanced Statistics Comparison by Age

Seasons are aligned by the age each player spent most of that calendar year. Metrics are precomputed from eligible main-draw results; point-stat values use the available detailed sample. Bold green marks the stronger value when both underlying samples are sufficient. Lower is better for Schedule because a negative value means a tougher schedule. Career Schedule is normalized per 100 matches.

Age Amy Frazier Emilie Loit
Yr Elo P+ Serve+ Return+ PD TPW% Hard Elo Clay Elo Grass Elo Set Win % Set Margin Dec. Set Tiebreak Pressure+ Schedule Yr Elo P+ Serve+ Return+ PD TPW% Hard Elo Clay Elo Grass Elo Set Win % Set Margin Dec. Set Tiebreak Pressure+ Schedule
14 1987 1527 108.1 — — — — — +47 — 40.0% -0.80 1–0 — — +0.61 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
15 1988 1637 125.6 — — — — +7 -79 -84 44.4% -0.51 5–4 (56%) 3–2 (60%) — +0.73 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
16 1989 1717 128.7 — — — — +48 -175 -186 56.5% +0.39 7–4 (64%) 4–3 (57%) — +1.67 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
17 1990 1892 153.8 — — — — +24 — -294 63.3% +0.94 12–7 (63%) 6–4 (60%) — -1.37 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
18 1991 1813 142.7 — — — — +14 — -146 57.3% +0.55 5–5 (50%) 5–6 (45%) — +3.08 1997 1499 112.1 — — — — — — — 33.3% -1.67 0–1 — — -0.22
19 1992 1844 151.1 — — — — +7 -184 -136 62.7% +0.93 7–5 (58%) 9–3 (75%) — +0.93 1998 1512 121.9 — — — — +45 +20 — 44.4% -0.11 0–2 0–1 — +0.24
20 1993 1845 143.2 — — — — +1 — — 50.0% -0.02 3–1 (75%) 2–2 (50%) — +0.29 1999 1424 101.4 — — — — +104 +28 — 26.2% -1.86 1–5 (17%) 0–3 (0%) — +0.55
21 1994 1904 156.1 — — — — +63 -246 — 61.7% +0.73 6–4 (60%) 5–2 (71%) — -0.10 2000 1458 109.0 — — — — +67 +11 — 45.8% -0.12 1–3 (25%) 0–2 — +0.50
22 1995 1877 148.4 — — — — +50 -219 — 62.6% +0.87 4–5 (44%) 4–1 (80%) — +0.40 2001 1547 113.0 — — — — -32 -21 — 44.3% -0.61 4–5 (44%) 2–2 (50%) — +0.79
23 1996 1836 148.1 — — — — +37 — -100 57.1% +0.57 3–4 (43%) 5–3 (63%) — +0.72 2002 1626 113.6 — — — — -91 +30 — 52.4% -0.04 10–6 (63%) 4–3 (57%) — +0.19
24 1997 1819 152.4 — — — — +41 -182 -89 52.6% +0.18 2–6 (25%) 3–5 (38%) — -2.18 2003 1673 132.7 +2.59 +0.21 1.090 51.0% -71 +43 -104 49.1% -0.05 10–8 (56%) 5–5 (50%) — -1.57
25 1998 1766 134.9 — — — — +18 — — 49.2% +0.03 6–7 (46%) 3–2 (60%) — +0.87 2004 1668 124.9 -0.94 -1.99 0.870 46.7% -119 +171 -41 59.8% +0.45 9–6 (60%) 6–7 (46%) — +1.06
26 1999 1877 154.2 — — — — +23 -198 — 57.8% +0.40 11–7 (61%) 5–4 (56%) — -1.53 2005 1549 112.1 -0.35 +0.26 1.107 52.4% -55 +179 — 48.8% -0.19 3–9 (25%) 4–3 (57%) — +1.69
27 2000 1854 148.5 — — — — +35 -256 -228 55.7% +0.28 10–8 (56%) 10–4 (71%) — -0.80 2006 1622 125.1 -1.55 +0.33 0.990 50.1% -86 +130 — 55.7% +0.60 5–4 (56%) 5–8 (38%) — +1.39
28 2001 1696 121.2 — — — — +25 -40 -41 49.4% -0.45 5–6 (45%) 4–2 (67%) — +3.27 2007 1619 129.8 -0.93 +0.96 1.001 50.0% -37 +141 — 55.4% +0.37 7–4 (64%) 4–4 (50%) — -0.20
29 2002 1758 137.9 — — — — -7 -98 -102 48.8% +0.10 8–6 (57%) 2–5 (29%) — -1.62 2008 1518 106.1 -4.05 -3.45 0.777 44.3% 0 +121 — 30.2% -1.60 2–3 (40%) 3–5 (38%) — -0.27
30 2003 1727 129.3 -1.13 +0.72 0.874 46.8% +3 -101 -29 46.4% -0.07 4–2 (67%) 2–3 (40%) — -0.74 2009 1533 118.8 +0.06 -0.68 0.916 48.8% +33 +65 — 44.4% -0.39 2–2 (50%) 1–0 — +0.07
31 2004 1826 140.0 +0.10 +2.08 1.076 51.4% -2 -150 -98 63.9% +0.95 9–6 (60%) 3–6 (33%) — +0.72 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
32 2005 1730 125.0 -2.39 +1.34 0.941 48.4% +41 -85 -50 51.9% +0.28 6–5 (55%) 3–3 (50%) — +1.05 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
33 2006 1627 115.5 -1.77 -1.22 0.893 47.7% +45 -57 +111 39.3% -0.70 4–2 (67%) 3–5 (38%) — -0.09 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Career — 1957 149.8 -1.31 +0.33 0.945 48.7% +26 -129 -114 55.5% +0.36 118–94 (56%) 81–65 (55%) 103.1 +0.82 — 1780 125.3 -1.16 -0.31 0.956 49.0% -44 +99 -67 49.4% -0.12 54–58 (48%) 34–43 (44%) 98.9 +1.24

Career Rivalries

Each player's five most-played main-draw opponents. The current matchup is highlighted when it appears in a player's top five.