H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Flavia Pennetta vs Vania King H2H: 2-1
Flavia Pennetta holds a 2–1 lead over Vania King in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on hard courts, while Flavia Pennetta leads 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Vania King won the 2013 Osaka third round 3-6 7-5 6-0.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
ITA
Age 44
Right-Handed
172 cm / 5'8"
H2H
2
–
1
3 main draw meetings
USA
Age 37
Right-Handed
165 cm / 5'5"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 10, 2013* | Osaka | WTA 250 | R32 | Hard | Vania King | 3-6 7-5 6-0 | Flavia Pennetta | Match data |
| Jun 25, 2009* | Wimbledon | Grand Slam | R64 | Grass | Flavia Pennetta | 6-2 6-2 | Vania King | Match data |
| Sep 11, 2008* | Bali | WTA 500 | R32 | Hard | Flavia Pennetta | 7-6(7) 6-1 | Vania 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Flavia Pennetta | #15 | #6 | 3,621 | 1,982 | 418 | 272 | 60.6% | 1 | 1 | 0 | 6 | 3 | 11 |
| Vania King | #824 | #50 | 1,225 | 1,760 | 128 | 160 | 44.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
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 | Flavia Pennetta | Vania King | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2005 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #164 | 1,520 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2006 | 16–13 | 55.2% | #60 | 1,661 | 0 | 1 |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2007 | 15–21 | 41.7% | #109 | 1,608 | 0 | 1 |
| 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2008 | 7–19 | 26.9% | #128 | 1,512 | 0 | 1 |
| 20 | 2002 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #95 | 1,482 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 11–12 | 47.8% | #80 | 1,588 | 0 | 1 |
| 21 | 2003 | 18–20 | 47.4% | #69 | 1,559 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 14–17 | 45.2% | #86 | 1,595 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 2004 | 30–22 | 57.7% | #38 | 1,670 | 0 | 1 | 2011 | 13–14 | 48.1% | #76 | 1,689 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 2005 | 37–21 | 63.8% | #23 | 1,777 | 0 | 3 | 2012 | 15–19 | 44.1% | #69 | 1,614 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 2006 | 29–18 | 61.7% | #28 | 1,729 | 0 | 3 | 2013 | 8–11 | 42.1% | #85 | 1,630 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 2007 | 30–24 | 55.6% | #39 | 1,768 | 0 | 4 | 2014 | 13–15 | 46.4% | #111 | 1,641 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2008 | 50–23 | 68.5% | #13 | 1,900 | 0 | 6 | 2015 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #410 | 1,627 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2009 | 52–23 | 69.3% | #12 | 1,902 | 0 | 8 | 2016 | 13–11 | 54.2% | #78 | 1,643 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2010 | 45–23 | 66.2% | #24 | 1,847 | 0 | 9 | 2017 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #492 | 1,590 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 2011 | 31–22 | 58.5% | #20 | 1,785 | 0 | 9 | 2018 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #356 | 1,559 | 0 | 1 |
| 30 | 2012 | 19–13 | 59.4% | #45 | 1,735 | 0 | 9 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 2013 | 19–20 | 48.7% | #31 | 1,745 | 0 | 9 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 2014 | 30–20 | 60.0% | #12 | 1,780 | 0 | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 2015 | 27–20 | 57.4% | #8 | 1,823 | 1 | 11 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |