H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Anne Keothavong vs Maria Elena Camerin H2H: 1-0
Anne Keothavong holds a 1–0 lead over Maria Elena Camerin in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Anne Keothavong leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Anne Keothavong won the 2009 Memphis third round 3-6 6-3 6-1.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
GBR
Age 42
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
ITA
Age 44
Right-Handed
164 cm / 5'5"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 19, 2009* | Memphis | WTA 250 | R32 | Hard | Anne Keothavong | 3-6 6-3 6-1 | Maria Elena Camerin | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Anne Keothavong | #287 | #48 | 1,315 | 1,633 | 48 | 89 | 35.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Maria Elena Camerin | #817 | #41 | 774 | 1,666 | 97 | 147 | 39.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
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 | Anne Keothavong | Maria Elena Camerin | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 2001 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #271 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 2002 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #236 | 1,475 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 2003 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #177 | 1,464 | 0 | 0 | 2001 | 6–5 | 54.5% | #112 | 1,546 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2004 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #180 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 | 2002 | 5–8 | 38.5% | #123 | 1,525 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2005 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #236 | 1,467 | 0 | 0 | 2003 | 3–8 | 27.3% | #100 | 1,495 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2006 | 0–7 | 0.0% | #144 | 1,400 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 21–19 | 52.5% | #43 | 1,657 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2007 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #132 | 1,425 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 11–22 | 33.3% | #99 | 1,563 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2008 | 4–8 | 33.3% | #60 | 1,463 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 22–23 | 48.9% | #50 | 1,611 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2009 | 13–15 | 46.4% | #100 | 1,539 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 9–18 | 33.3% | #100 | 1,546 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2010 | 11–13 | 45.8% | #121 | 1,613 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 5–11 | 31.2% | #104 | 1,511 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2011 | 8–9 | 47.1% | #72 | 1,618 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 5–14 | 26.3% | #114 | 1,475 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2012 | 6–17 | 26.1% | #143 | 1,532 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 6–11 | 35.3% | #111 | 1,496 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2013 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #287 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #177 | 1,491 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2012 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #168 | 1,499 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2013 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #192 | 1,520 | 0 | 0 |