H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Marina Erakovic vs Melinda Czink H2H: 1-0
Marina Erakovic holds a 1–0 lead over Melinda Czink in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Marina Erakovic leads 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Marina Erakovic won the 2010 Birmingham second round 7-5 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.
NZL
Age 38
Right-Handed
174 cm / 5'9"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
HUN
Age 43
Left-Handed
178 cm / 5'10"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 9, 2010* | Birmingham | WTA 250 | R64 | Grass | Marina Erakovic | 7-5 6-4 | Melinda Czink | 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 |
| Melinda Czink | #691 | #37 | 1,571 | 1,794 | 89 | 136 | 39.6% | 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.
| Age | Marina Erakovic | Melinda Czink | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 2005 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #213 | 1,498 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 2007 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #153 | 1,457 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 2008 | 16–16 | 50.0% | #66 | 1,531 | 0 | 0 | 2003 | 4–3 | 57.1% | #79 | 1,568 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2009 | 4–7 | 36.4% | #227 | 1,522 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 2–15 | 11.8% | #128 | 1,427 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2010 | 2–7 | 22.2% | #333 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 9–12 | 42.9% | #96 | 1,478 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2011 | 11–8 | 57.9% | #61 | 1,630 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 14–18 | 43.8% | #105 | 1,500 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2012 | 19–20 | 48.7% | #66 | 1,600 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 3–9 | 25.0% | #124 | 1,456 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2013 | 20–16 | 55.6% | #46 | 1,673 | 0 | 1 | 2008 | 10–11 | 47.6% | #106 | 1,558 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2014 | 12–20 | 37.5% | #76 | 1,609 | 0 | 1 | 2009 | 29–21 | 58.0% | #37 | 1,741 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2015 | 7–14 | 33.3% | #135 | 1,543 | 0 | 1 | 2010 | 3–16 | 15.8% | #312 | 1,524 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2016 | 11–8 | 57.9% | #106 | 1,625 | 0 | 1 | 2011 | 3–6 | 33.3% | #143 | 1,519 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 2017 | 1–9 | 10.0% | #197 | 1,551 | 0 | 1 | 2012 | 9–16 | 36.0% | #94 | 1,543 | 0 | 1 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2013 | 3–9 | 25.0% | #254 | 1,499 | 0 | 1 |