H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Emilie Loit vs Tatiana Poutchek H2H: 0-1
Tatiana Poutchek holds a 1–0 lead over Emilie Loit in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Tatiana Poutchek leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Tatiana Poutchek won the 2002 Budapest fourth round 6-2 2-6 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
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
BLR
Age 47
Right-Handed
176 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 19, 2002* | Budapest | WTA 250 | R16 | Clay | Tatiana Poutchek | 6-2 2-6 6-3 | 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 |
| Tatiana Poutchek | #1,078 | #55 | 609 | 1,626 | 51 | 101 | 33.6% | 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 | Emilie Loit | Tatiana Poutchek | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1995 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #734 | 1,484 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 1997 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #243 | 1,498 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 1998 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #96 | 1,511 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 1999 | 3–15 | 16.7% | #101 | 1,424 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #136 | 1,483 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2000 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #101 | 1,456 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 5–7 | 41.7% | #86 | 1,506 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2001 | 12–15 | 44.4% | #95 | 1,548 | 0 | 0 | 2001 | 12–21 | 36.4% | #76 | 1,551 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2002 | 19–17 | 52.8% | #58 | 1,625 | 0 | 0 | 2002 | 14–22 | 38.9% | #100 | 1,513 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2003 | 23–24 | 48.9% | #41 | 1,673 | 0 | 0 | 2003 | 6–11 | 35.3% | #121 | 1,487 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2004 | 29–20 | 59.2% | #45 | 1,651 | 0 | 2 | 2004 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #223 | 1,476 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2005 | 15–20 | 42.9% | #82 | 1,546 | 0 | 2 | 2005 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #161 | 1,436 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2006 | 20–16 | 55.6% | #56 | 1,621 | 0 | 2 | 2006 | 3–7 | 30.0% | #123 | 1,418 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2007 | 26–22 | 54.2% | #43 | 1,609 | 0 | 3 | 2007 | 7–16 | 30.4% | #94 | 1,432 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2008 | 5–15 | 25.0% | #137 | 1,513 | 0 | 3 | 2008 | 3–6 | 33.3% | #171 | 1,448 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2009 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #161 | 1,531 | 0 | 3 | 2009 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #263 | 1,427 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2010 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #421 | 1,419 | 0 | 0 |