H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Kaia Kanepi vs Vania King H2H: 3-0
Kaia Kanepi holds a 3–0 lead over Vania King in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Kaia Kanepi leads 2–0 on clay and 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Kaia Kanepi won the 2013 US Open first round 4-6 7-6(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.
EST
Age 41
Right-Handed
179 cm / 5'10"
H2H
3
–
0
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 28, 2013* | US Open | Grand Slam | R128 | Hard | Kaia Kanepi | 4-6 7-6(4) 6-1 | Vania King | Match data |
| May 4, 2012* | Estoril | WTA 250 | R16 | Clay | Kaia Kanepi | 6-3 6-4 | Vania King | Match data |
| May 6, 2009* | Rome | WTA 1000 | R64 | Clay | Kaia Kanepi | 6-4 6-3 | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kaia Kanepi | #1,322 | #15 | 2,760 | 1,912 | 261 | 235 | 52.6% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 4 |
| 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 | Kaia Kanepi | Vania King | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | 2001 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #200 | 1,496 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #164 | 1,520 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 2002 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #285 | 1,498 | 0 | 0 | 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 | 2005 | 3–2 | 60.0% | #98 | 1,538 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 11–12 | 47.8% | #80 | 1,588 | 0 | 1 |
| 21 | 2006 | 14–16 | 46.7% | #78 | 1,610 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 14–17 | 45.2% | #86 | 1,595 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 2007 | 13–17 | 43.3% | #75 | 1,583 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 13–14 | 48.1% | #76 | 1,689 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 2008 | 28–20 | 58.3% | #27 | 1,747 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 15–19 | 44.1% | #69 | 1,614 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 2009 | 15–21 | 41.7% | #58 | 1,598 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 8–11 | 42.1% | #85 | 1,630 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 2010 | 29–17 | 63.0% | #22 | 1,839 | 0 | 1 | 2014 | 13–15 | 46.4% | #111 | 1,641 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2011 | 19–17 | 52.8% | #34 | 1,816 | 0 | 1 | 2015 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #410 | 1,627 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2012 | 25–9 | 73.5% | #19 | 1,868 | 0 | 3 | 2016 | 13–11 | 54.2% | #78 | 1,643 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2013 | 21–10 | 67.7% | #30 | 1,841 | 0 | 4 | 2017 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #492 | 1,590 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 2014 | 17–19 | 47.2% | #51 | 1,718 | 0 | 4 | 2018 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #356 | 1,559 | 0 | 1 |
| 30 | 2015 | 8–12 | 40.0% | #122 | 1,649 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 2016 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #376 | 1,655 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 2017 | 4–2 | 66.7% | #100 | 1,725 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 2018 | 11–11 | 50.0% | #61 | 1,776 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 34 | 2019 | 9–10 | 47.4% | #101 | 1,748 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 35 | 2020 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #93 | 1,719 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 36 | 2021 | 11–12 | 47.8% | #73 | 1,703 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 37 | 2022 | 24–16 | 60.0% | #32 | 1,801 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 38 | 2023 | 6–16 | 27.3% | #168 | 1,607 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |