H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Laura Granville vs Cara Black H2H: 2-1
Laura Granville holds a 2–1 lead over Cara Black in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Laura Granville leads 2–0 on hard courts, while Cara Black leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Cara Black won the 2003 Rome third round 7-5 1-6 6-4.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
USA
Age 45
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H
2
–
1
3 main draw meetings
ZIM
Age 47
Right-Handed
167 cm / 5'6"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 15, 2003* | Rome | WTA 1000 | R32 | Clay | Cara Black | 7-5 1-6 6-4 | Laura Granville | Match data |
| Jan 3, 2003* | Auckland | WTA 250 | R16 | Hard | Laura Granville | 6-3 6-2 | Cara Black | Match data |
| Oct 17, 2002* | Bratislava | WTA 250 | R32 | Hard | Laura Granville | 4-6 7-5 6-1 | Cara Black | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Laura Granville | #466 | #28 | 1,063 | 1,722 | 86 | 108 | 44.3% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Cara Black | #679 | #31 | 869 | 1,770 | 114 | 149 | 43.3% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 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 | Laura Granville | Cara Black | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 1998 | 1–1 | 50.0% | — | 1,512 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 1999 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #841 | 1,501 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1998 | 10–10 | 50.0% | #44 | 1,614 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2001 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #220 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 17–22 | 43.6% | #50 | 1,628 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2002 | 11–10 | 52.4% | #49 | 1,637 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 22–20 | 52.4% | #41 | 1,742 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2003 | 22–22 | 50.0% | #46 | 1,651 | 0 | 0 | 2001 | 19–25 | 43.2% | #58 | 1,635 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2004 | 17–19 | 47.2% | #74 | 1,612 | 0 | 0 | 2002 | 20–21 | 48.8% | #56 | 1,620 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 2005 | 12–15 | 44.4% | #60 | 1,616 | 0 | 0 | 2003 | 18–25 | 41.9% | #51 | 1,601 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 2006 | 12–16 | 42.9% | #68 | 1,590 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 5–20 | 20.0% | #138 | 1,457 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2007 | 11–15 | 42.3% | #61 | 1,611 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #179 | 1,491 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2008 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #379 | 1,592 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #288 | 1,496 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2009 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #293 | 1,564 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 2010 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #448 | 1,541 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #660 | 1,480 | 0 | 1 |