H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Maria Elena Camerin vs Lourdes Domínguez Lino H2H: 1-0
Maria Elena Camerin holds a 1–0 lead over Lourdes Domínguez Lino in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Maria Elena Camerin leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Maria Elena Camerin won the 2009 Budapest third round 4-6 6-0 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.
ITA
Age 44
Right-Handed
164 cm / 5'5"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
ESP
Age 45
Right-Handed
163 cm / 5'4"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 9, 2009* | Budapest | WTA 250 | R32 | Clay | Maria Elena Camerin | 4-6 6-0 6-1 | Lourdes Domínguez Lino | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Maria Elena Camerin | #817 | #41 | 774 | 1,666 | 97 | 147 | 39.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Lourdes Domínguez Lino | #1,129 | #40 | 1,305 | 1,674 | 125 | 157 | 44.3% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
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 | Maria Elena Camerin | Lourdes Domínguez Lino | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 19 | 2001 | 6–5 | 54.5% | #112 | 1,546 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #141 | 1,489 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2002 | 5–8 | 38.5% | #123 | 1,525 | 0 | 0 | 2001 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #378 | 1,479 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2003 | 3–8 | 27.3% | #100 | 1,495 | 0 | 0 | 2002 | 4–3 | 57.1% | #390 | 1,518 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2004 | 21–19 | 52.5% | #43 | 1,657 | 0 | 0 | 2003 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #319 | 1,503 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2005 | 11–22 | 33.3% | #99 | 1,563 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #208 | 1,508 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2006 | 22–23 | 48.9% | #50 | 1,611 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 6–4 | 60.0% | #72 | 1,553 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2007 | 9–18 | 33.3% | #100 | 1,546 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 21–19 | 52.5% | #52 | 1,622 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2008 | 5–11 | 31.2% | #104 | 1,511 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 16–21 | 43.2% | #71 | 1,558 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2009 | 5–14 | 26.3% | #114 | 1,475 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 6–11 | 35.3% | #91 | 1,521 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2010 | 6–11 | 35.3% | #111 | 1,496 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 6–13 | 31.6% | #134 | 1,484 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 2011 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #177 | 1,491 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #85 | 1,493 | 0 | 1 |
| 30 | 2012 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #168 | 1,499 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 16–16 | 50.0% | #79 | 1,583 | 0 | 2 |
| 31 | 2013 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #192 | 1,520 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 16–16 | 50.0% | #48 | 1,653 | 0 | 2 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2013 | 17–22 | 43.6% | #69 | 1,620 | 0 | 2 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2014 | 7–11 | 38.9% | #110 | 1,570 | 0 | 2 |
| 34 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2015 | 4–5 | 44.4% | #100 | 1,552 | 0 | 2 |
| 35 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2016 | 3–8 | 27.3% | #220 | 1,517 | 0 | 2 |