H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Emilie Loit vs Paola Suarez H2H: 1-2
Paola Suarez holds a 2–1 lead over Emilie Loit in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on clay, while Paola Suarez leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Emilie Loit won the 2007 Bogota fourth round 6-4 4-6 6-3.
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
–
2
3 main draw meetings
ARG
Age 50
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 23, 2007* | Bogota | WTA 500 | R16 | Clay | Emilie Loit | 6-4 4-6 6-3 | Paola Suarez | Match data |
| Oct 22, 2004* | Zurich | WTA 1000 | R16 | Hard | Paola Suarez | 6-1 2-2 (ret.) | Emilie Loit | Match data |
| May 26, 1999* | Roland Garros | Grand Slam | R128 | Clay | Paola Suarez | 6-3 6-2 | Emilie Loit | 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 |
| Paola Suarez | #525 | #9 | 2,081 | 1,916 | 223 | 180 | 55.3% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 4 |
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 | Paola Suarez | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1993 | 2–1 | 66.7% | #197 | 1,519 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 1997 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #243 | 1,498 | 0 | 0 | 1994 | 5–8 | 38.5% | #114 | 1,536 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1998 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #96 | 1,511 | 0 | 0 | 1995 | 2–6 | 25.0% | #122 | 1,522 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1999 | 3–15 | 16.7% | #101 | 1,424 | 0 | 0 | 1996 | 12–11 | 52.2% | #62 | 1,618 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2000 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #101 | 1,456 | 0 | 0 | 1997 | 6–16 | 27.3% | #118 | 1,556 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2001 | 12–15 | 44.4% | #95 | 1,548 | 0 | 0 | 1998 | 10–9 | 52.6% | #80 | 1,535 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 2002 | 19–17 | 52.8% | #58 | 1,625 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 12–12 | 50.0% | #72 | 1,597 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 2003 | 23–24 | 48.9% | #41 | 1,673 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 27–22 | 55.1% | #36 | 1,677 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 2004 | 29–20 | 59.2% | #45 | 1,651 | 0 | 2 | 2001 | 27–15 | 64.3% | #27 | 1,736 | 0 | 2 |
| 26 | 2005 | 15–20 | 42.9% | #82 | 1,546 | 0 | 2 | 2002 | 30–23 | 56.6% | #27 | 1,697 | 0 | 2 |
| 27 | 2006 | 20–16 | 55.6% | #56 | 1,621 | 0 | 2 | 2003 | 37–22 | 62.7% | #14 | 1,859 | 0 | 3 |
| 28 | 2007 | 26–22 | 54.2% | #43 | 1,609 | 0 | 3 | 2004 | 37–17 | 68.5% | #16 | 1,804 | 0 | 4 |
| 29 | 2008 | 5–15 | 25.0% | #137 | 1,513 | 0 | 3 | 2005 | 3–7 | 30.0% | #238 | 1,712 | 0 | 4 |
| 30 | 2009 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #161 | 1,531 | 0 | 3 | 2006 | 10–9 | 52.6% | #178 | 1,699 | 0 | 4 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2007 | 3–2 | 60.0% | #300 | 1,689 | 0 | 4 |