H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 08:25 UTC
Marina Erakovic vs Maria Kirilenko H2H: 0-1
Maria Kirilenko holds a 1–0 lead over Marina Erakovic in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Maria Kirilenko leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Maria Kirilenko won the 2009 Monterrey third 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.
NZL
Age 38
Right-Handed
174 cm / 5'9"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
RUS
Age 39
Right-Handed
174 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 5, 2009* | Monterrey | WTA 500 | R32 | Hard | Maria Kirilenko | 6-4 6-3 | Marina Erakovic | 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 |
| Maria Kirilenko | #947 | #10 | 3,471 | 1,910 | 282 | 228 | 55.3% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 6 |
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 | Marina Erakovic | Maria Kirilenko | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2002 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #373 | 1,479 | 0 | 0 |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2003 | 5–5 | 50.0% | #124 | 1,522 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 2005 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #213 | 1,498 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 8–9 | 47.1% | #107 | 1,575 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2005 | 29–21 | 58.0% | #25 | 1,741 | 0 | 1 |
| 19 | 2007 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #153 | 1,457 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 23–25 | 47.9% | #30 | 1,656 | 0 | 1 |
| 20 | 2008 | 16–16 | 50.0% | #66 | 1,531 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 28–26 | 51.9% | #25 | 1,739 | 0 | 2 |
| 21 | 2009 | 4–7 | 36.4% | #227 | 1,522 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 34–22 | 60.7% | #29 | 1,722 | 0 | 5 |
| 22 | 2010 | 2–7 | 22.2% | #333 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 21–24 | 46.7% | #62 | 1,719 | 0 | 5 |
| 23 | 2011 | 11–8 | 57.9% | #61 | 1,630 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 37–23 | 61.7% | #20 | 1,827 | 0 | 5 |
| 24 | 2012 | 19–20 | 48.7% | #66 | 1,600 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 29–23 | 55.8% | #28 | 1,816 | 0 | 5 |
| 25 | 2013 | 20–16 | 55.6% | #46 | 1,673 | 0 | 1 | 2012 | 29–20 | 59.2% | #14 | 1,775 | 0 | 5 |
| 26 | 2014 | 12–20 | 37.5% | #76 | 1,609 | 0 | 1 | 2013 | 34–18 | 65.4% | #19 | 1,786 | 0 | 6 |
| 27 | 2015 | 7–14 | 33.3% | #135 | 1,543 | 0 | 1 | 2014 | 5–9 | 35.7% | #187 | 1,698 | 0 | 6 |
| 28 | 2016 | 11–8 | 57.9% | #106 | 1,625 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 2017 | 1–9 | 10.0% | #197 | 1,551 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |