H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 08:25 UTC
Emmanuelle Gagliardi vs Florencia Labat H2H: 0-1
Florencia Labat holds a 1–0 lead over Emmanuelle Gagliardi in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Florencia Labat leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Florencia Labat won the 2000 Bogota third round 6-3 3-6 7-6(6).
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
SUI
Age 50
Right-Handed
171 cm / 5'7"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
ARG
Age 55
Left-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 10, 2000* | Bogota | WTA 250 | R32 | Clay | Florencia Labat | 6-3 3-6 7-6(6) | Emmanuelle Gagliardi | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Emmanuelle Gagliardi | #736 | #42 | 781 | 1,695 | 117 | 182 | 39.1% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Florencia Labat | #106 | #26 | 733 | 1,875 | 190 | 181 | 51.2% | 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 | Emmanuelle Gagliardi | Florencia Labat | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1986 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,482 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 1995 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #229 | 1,464 | 0 | 0 | 1989 | 8–8 | 50.0% | #77 | 1,546 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1996 | 2–1 | 66.7% | #123 | 1,504 | 0 | 0 | 1990 | 12–18 | 40.0% | #100 | 1,572 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1997 | 7–9 | 43.8% | #78 | 1,531 | 0 | 0 | 1991 | 19–17 | 52.8% | #60 | 1,671 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1998 | 5–12 | 29.4% | #101 | 1,497 | 0 | 0 | 1992 | 18–16 | 52.9% | #52 | 1,736 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1999 | 11–14 | 44.0% | #68 | 1,563 | 0 | 0 | 1993 | 21–16 | 56.8% | #51 | 1,764 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2000 | 12–19 | 38.7% | #95 | 1,550 | 0 | 0 | 1994 | 27–15 | 64.3% | #38 | 1,793 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2001 | 10–17 | 37.0% | #69 | 1,548 | 0 | 0 | 1995 | 16–13 | 55.2% | #55 | 1,783 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2002 | 19–23 | 45.2% | #61 | 1,583 | 0 | 0 | 1996 | 24–17 | 58.5% | #42 | 1,767 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2003 | 25–23 | 52.1% | #56 | 1,608 | 0 | 0 | 1997 | 21–25 | 45.7% | #39 | 1,674 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2004 | 8–18 | 30.8% | #105 | 1,524 | 0 | 0 | 1998 | 13–20 | 39.4% | #64 | 1,655 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2005 | 10–15 | 40.0% | #95 | 1,505 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 3–6 | 33.3% | #117 | 1,620 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2006 | 7–17 | 29.2% | #115 | 1,470 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 8–9 | 47.1% | #106 | 1,624 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2007 | 1–10 | 9.1% | #131 | 1,409 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 2008 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #261 | 1,401 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |