H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Billie Jean King vs Lea Pericoli H2H: 1-1
Billie Jean King and Lea Pericoli are tied 1–1 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Lea Pericoli leads 1–0 on clay, while Billie Jean King leads 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Billie Jean King won the 1970 Wimbledon fourth round 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.
Age 82
Right-Handed
164 cm / 5'5"
H2H
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
ITA
Right-Handed
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 1, 1970* | Wimbledon | Grand Slam | R16 | Grass | Billie Jean King | 6-1 6-2 | Lea Pericoli | Match data |
| Jul 27, 1969* | Gstaad | WTA 250 | QF | Clay | Lea Pericoli | 6-3 6-3 | Billie Jean King | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Billie Jean King | #22 | #13 | — | 2,402 | 684 | 160 | 81.0% | 9 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 59 | 72 |
| Lea Pericoli | — | — | — | 1,764 | 58 | 51 | 53.2% | 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 | Billie Jean King | Lea Pericoli | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 24 | 1968 | 40–5 | 88.9% | — | 1,823 | 2 | 6 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 25 | 1969 | 58–14 | 80.6% | — | 2,043 | 2 | 11 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 26 | 1970 | 47–11 | 81.0% | — | 2,172 | 2 | 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 27 | 1971 | 114–15 | 88.4% | — | 2,293 | 3 | 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 1972 | 89–15 | 85.6% | — | 2,341 | 6 | 43 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 1973 | 56–12 | 82.4% | — | 2,294 | 7 | 50 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 1974 | 54–8 | 87.1% | — | 2,300 | 8 | 56 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 1975 | 23–3 | 88.5% | — | 2,370 | 9 | 58 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 1976 | 2–2 | 50.0% | — | 2,316 | 9 | 58 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 1977 | 46–6 | 88.5% | — | 2,386 | 9 | 64 | 1968 | 8–5 | 61.5% | — | 1,560 | 0 | 1 |
| 34 | 1978 | 28–12 | 70.0% | — | 2,301 | 9 | 64 | 1969 | 15–7 | 68.2% | — | 1,692 | 0 | 2 |
| 35 | 1979 | 36–13 | 73.5% | — | 2,164 | 9 | 66 | 1970 | 11–7 | 61.1% | — | 1,747 | 0 | 3 |
| 36 | 1980 | 39–15 | 72.2% | — | 2,122 | 9 | 69 | 1971 | 9–8 | 52.9% | — | 1,746 | 0 | 3 |
| 37 | 1981 | 4–5 | 44.4% | — | 2,019 | 9 | 69 | 1972 | 3–6 | 33.3% | — | 1,653 | 0 | 3 |
| 38 | 1982 | 26–19 | 57.8% | — | 1,932 | 9 | 70 | 1973 | 4–3 | 57.1% | — | 1,645 | 0 | 3 |
| 39 | 1983 | 22–5 | 81.5% | — | 2,052 | 9 | 72 | 1974 | 6–6 | 50.0% | — | 1,641 | 0 | 3 |
| 40 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1975 | 2–7 | 22.2% | — | 1,554 | 0 | 3 |
| 41 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1976 | 0–2 | 0.0% | — | 1,529 | 0 | 3 |