H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Marina Erakovic vs Irina Falconi Hartman H2H: 2-0
Marina Erakovic holds a 2–0 lead over Irina Falconi Hartman in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Marina Erakovic leads 1–0 on grass and 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Marina Erakovic won the 2016 Wimbledon first round 4-6 6-3 10-8.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
NZL
Age 38
Right-Handed
174 cm / 5'9"
H2H
2
–
0
2 main draw meetings
USA
Right-Handed
163 cm / 5'4"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 29, 2016* | Wimbledon | Grand Slam | R128 | Grass | Marina Erakovic | 4-6 6-3 10-8 | Irina Falconi Hartman | Match data |
| Sep 16, 2011* | Quebec City | WTA 250 | R16 | Hard | Marina Erakovic | 6-3 2-6 6-2 | Irina Falconi Hartman | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Marina Erakovic | #827 | #39 | 1,392 | 1,701 | 105 | 131 | 44.5% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Irina Falconi Hartman | #1,008 | #63 | 1,005 | 1,614 | 42 | 72 | 36.8% | 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.
| Marina Erakovic | Irina Falconi Hartman | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles |
| 2005 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #213 | 1,498 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #184 | 1,488 | 0 | 0 |
| 2007 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #153 | 1,457 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 8–13 | 38.1% | #84 | 1,529 | 0 | 0 |
| 2008 | 16–16 | 50.0% | #66 | 1,531 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 6–13 | 31.6% | #151 | 1,500 | 0 | 0 |
| 2009 | 4–7 | 36.4% | #227 | 1,522 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #144 | 1,497 | 0 | 0 |
| 2010 | 2–7 | 22.2% | #333 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #112 | 1,498 | 0 | 0 |
| 2011 | 11–8 | 57.9% | #61 | 1,630 | 0 | 0 | 2015 | 12–17 | 41.4% | #76 | 1,551 | 0 | 0 |
| 2012 | 19–20 | 48.7% | #66 | 1,600 | 0 | 0 | 2016 | 11–12 | 47.8% | #99 | 1,560 | 0 | 1 |
| 2013 | 20–16 | 55.6% | #46 | 1,673 | 0 | 1 | 2017 | 2–7 | 22.2% | #129 | 1,497 | 0 | 1 |
| 2014 | 12–20 | 37.5% | #76 | 1,609 | 0 | 1 | 2018 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #271 | 1,524 | 0 | 1 |
| 2015 | 7–14 | 33.3% | #135 | 1,543 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2016 | 11–8 | 57.9% | #106 | 1,625 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2017 | 1–9 | 10.0% | #197 | 1,551 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |