H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Lisa Raymond vs Emilie Loit H2H: 2-0
Lisa Raymond holds a 2–0 lead over Emilie Loit in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Lisa Raymond leads 2–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Lisa Raymond won the 2006 Indian Wells second round 6-7(5) 6-4 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 52
Right-Handed
165 cm / 5'5"
H2H
2
–
0
2 main draw meetings
FRA
Age 47
Left-Handed
167 cm / 5'6"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 8, 2006* | Indian Wells | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard | Lisa Raymond | 6-7(5) 6-4 6-4 | Emilie Loit | Match data |
| Sep 1, 1999* | US Open | Grand Slam | R128 | Hard | Lisa Raymond | 6-0 6-4 | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lisa Raymond | #884 | #15 | 1,695 | 1,945 | 325 | 272 | 54.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 4 |
| Emilie Loit | #161 | #27 | 1,016 | 1,780 | 162 | 180 | 47.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
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 | Lisa Raymond | Emilie Loit | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 15 | 1989 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #449 | 1,496 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 16 | 1990 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #336 | 1,480 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 1991 | 2–1 | 66.7% | #257 | 1,510 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 1992 | 7–6 | 53.8% | #75 | 1,617 | 0 | 0 | 1997 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #243 | 1,498 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1993 | 13–12 | 52.0% | #55 | 1,691 | 0 | 0 | 1998 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #96 | 1,511 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1994 | 19–17 | 52.8% | #44 | 1,749 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 3–15 | 16.7% | #101 | 1,424 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1995 | 25–16 | 61.0% | #20 | 1,813 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #101 | 1,456 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1996 | 23–19 | 54.8% | #27 | 1,859 | 0 | 1 | 2001 | 12–15 | 44.4% | #95 | 1,548 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 1997 | 31–21 | 59.6% | #17 | 1,910 | 0 | 1 | 2002 | 19–17 | 52.8% | #58 | 1,625 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 1998 | 29–21 | 58.0% | #27 | 1,837 | 0 | 1 | 2003 | 23–24 | 48.9% | #41 | 1,673 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 1999 | 22–23 | 48.9% | #28 | 1,784 | 0 | 1 | 2004 | 29–20 | 59.2% | #45 | 1,651 | 0 | 2 |
| 26 | 2000 | 26–20 | 56.5% | #30 | 1,795 | 0 | 2 | 2005 | 15–20 | 42.9% | #82 | 1,546 | 0 | 2 |
| 27 | 2001 | 33–21 | 61.1% | #22 | 1,833 | 0 | 2 | 2006 | 20–16 | 55.6% | #56 | 1,621 | 0 | 2 |
| 28 | 2002 | 29–21 | 58.0% | #29 | 1,755 | 0 | 3 | 2007 | 26–22 | 54.2% | #43 | 1,609 | 0 | 3 |
| 29 | 2003 | 25–18 | 58.1% | #27 | 1,767 | 0 | 4 | 2008 | 5–15 | 25.0% | #137 | 1,513 | 0 | 3 |
| 30 | 2004 | 18–18 | 50.0% | #30 | 1,746 | 0 | 4 | 2009 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #161 | 1,531 | 0 | 3 |
| 31 | 2005 | 14–19 | 42.4% | #74 | 1,631 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 2006 | 9–16 | 36.0% | #128 | 1,580 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 2007 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #884 | 1,563 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |