H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Maria Vento-Kabchi vs Angelica Gavaldon H2H: 0-1
Angelica Gavaldon holds a 1–0 lead over Maria Vento-Kabchi in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Angelica Gavaldon leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Angelica Gavaldon won the 1996 Indian Wells second round 6-4 6-3.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
VEN
Age 52
Right-Handed
168 cm / 5'6"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
MEX
Age 52
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 10, 1996* | Indian Wells | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard | Angelica Gavaldon | 6-4 6-3 | Maria Vento-Kabchi | 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 Vento-Kabchi | #996 | #26 | 1,053 | 1,716 | 95 | 156 | 37.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Angelica Gavaldon | #434 | #34 | 237 | 1,733 | 72 | 109 | 39.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
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 Vento-Kabchi | Angelica Gavaldon | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 14 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1988 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #264 | 1,498 | 0 | 0 |
| 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1989 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #191 | 1,500 | 0 | 0 |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1990 | 16–16 | 50.0% | #51 | 1,601 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1991 | 1–6 | 14.3% | #242 | 1,556 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 1992 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #551 | 1,496 | 0 | 0 | 1992 | 3–9 | 25.0% | #142 | 1,535 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1993 | 19–20 | 48.7% | #64 | 1,604 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1994 | 3–6 | 33.3% | #166 | 1,520 | 0 | 0 | 1994 | 9–16 | 36.0% | #119 | 1,601 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1995 | 5–8 | 38.5% | #86 | 1,551 | 0 | 0 | 1995 | 17–17 | 50.0% | #36 | 1,676 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1996 | 1–6 | 14.3% | #139 | 1,504 | 0 | 0 | 1996 | 2–10 | 16.7% | #219 | 1,586 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 1997 | 11–7 | 61.1% | #51 | 1,629 | 0 | 0 | 1997 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #107 | 1,522 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 1998 | 11–18 | 37.9% | #43 | 1,653 | 0 | 0 | 1998 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #697 | 1,517 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 1999 | 3–16 | 15.8% | #110 | 1,535 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #379 | 1,510 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2000 | 7–14 | 33.3% | #104 | 1,537 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #261 | 1,522 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2001 | 4–7 | 36.4% | #155 | 1,534 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 2002 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #172 | 1,512 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 2003 | 15–8 | 65.2% | #44 | 1,714 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 2004 | 18–26 | 40.9% | #48 | 1,628 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 2005 | 13–23 | 36.1% | #62 | 1,573 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 2006 | 2–12 | 14.3% | #324 | 1,461 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |