H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Emilie Loit vs Anne Kremer H2H: 1-0
Emilie Loit holds a 1–0 lead over Anne Kremer in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Emilie Loit leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Emilie Loit won the 2004 Acapulco third round 6-7(3) 6-4 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.
FRA
Age 47
Left-Handed
167 cm / 5'6"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
LUX
Age 50
Right-Handed
165 cm / 5'5"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 4, 2004* | Acapulco | WTA 250 | R32 | Clay | Emilie Loit | 6-7(3) 6-4 6-1 | Anne Kremer | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Emilie Loit | #161 | #27 | 1,016 | 1,780 | 162 | 180 | 47.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
| Anne Kremer | #1,039 | #18 | 1,265 | 1,810 | 147 | 182 | 44.7% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
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 | Emilie Loit | Anne Kremer | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 18 | 1997 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #243 | 1,498 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 1998 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #96 | 1,511 | 0 | 0 | 1995 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #242 | 1,516 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1999 | 3–15 | 16.7% | #101 | 1,424 | 0 | 0 | 1996 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #134 | 1,509 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2000 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #101 | 1,456 | 0 | 0 | 1997 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #128 | 1,510 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2001 | 12–15 | 44.4% | #95 | 1,548 | 0 | 0 | 1998 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #74 | 1,553 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2002 | 19–17 | 52.8% | #58 | 1,625 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 19–23 | 45.2% | #31 | 1,641 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2003 | 23–24 | 48.9% | #41 | 1,673 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 27–24 | 52.9% | #33 | 1,705 | 0 | 2 |
| 25 | 2004 | 29–20 | 59.2% | #45 | 1,651 | 0 | 2 | 2001 | 32–28 | 53.3% | #33 | 1,695 | 0 | 2 |
| 26 | 2005 | 15–20 | 42.9% | #82 | 1,546 | 0 | 2 | 2002 | 29–28 | 50.9% | #25 | 1,670 | 0 | 2 |
| 27 | 2006 | 20–16 | 55.6% | #56 | 1,621 | 0 | 2 | 2003 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #401 | 1,634 | 0 | 2 |
| 28 | 2007 | 26–22 | 54.2% | #43 | 1,609 | 0 | 3 | 2004 | 12–14 | 46.2% | #94 | 1,620 | 0 | 2 |
| 29 | 2008 | 5–15 | 25.0% | #137 | 1,513 | 0 | 3 | 2005 | 5–13 | 27.8% | #165 | 1,526 | 0 | 2 |
| 30 | 2009 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #161 | 1,531 | 0 | 3 | 2006 | 4–8 | 33.3% | #145 | 1,530 | 0 | 2 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2007 | 7–13 | 35.0% | #82 | 1,519 | 0 | 2 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2008 | 2–8 | 20.0% | #265 | 1,461 | 0 | 2 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2009 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #331 | 1,475 | 0 | 2 |
| 35 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2011 | 2–5 | 28.6% | #238 | 1,463 | 0 | 2 |