H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Marion Bartoli vs Emilie Loit H2H: 2-1
Marion Bartoli holds a 2–1 lead over Emilie Loit in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on hard courts, while Marion Bartoli leads 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Emilie Loit won the 2007 Auckland fourth 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.
FRA
Age 41
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H
2
–
1
3 main draw meetings
FRA
Age 47
Left-Handed
167 cm / 5'6"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 5, 2007* | Auckland | WTA 250 | R16 | Hard | Emilie Loit | 7-5 6-4 | Marion Bartoli | Match data |
| Jan 5, 2006* | Auckland | WTA 250 | R32 | Hard | Marion Bartoli | 6-7(5) 6-3 6-1 | Emilie Loit | Match data |
| Jun 11, 2003* | Birmingham | WTA 250 | R64 | Grass | Marion Bartoli | 6-1 6-3 | Emilie Loit | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Marion Bartoli | #13 | #7 | 5,160 | 1,996 | 402 | 267 | 60.1% | 1 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 2 | 8 |
| Emilie Loit | #161 | #27 | 1,016 | 1,780 | 162 | 180 | 47.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
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 | Marion Bartoli | Emilie Loit | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | 2001 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #307 | 1,483 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 2002 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #104 | 1,511 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 2003 | 20–21 | 48.8% | #58 | 1,643 | 0 | 0 | 1997 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #243 | 1,498 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2004 | 26–23 | 53.1% | #41 | 1,666 | 0 | 0 | 1998 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #96 | 1,511 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2005 | 26–25 | 51.0% | #37 | 1,632 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 3–15 | 16.7% | #101 | 1,424 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2006 | 45–28 | 61.6% | #18 | 1,800 | 0 | 3 | 2000 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #101 | 1,456 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2007 | 47–31 | 60.3% | #10 | 1,873 | 0 | 3 | 2001 | 12–15 | 44.4% | #95 | 1,548 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2008 | 30–26 | 53.6% | #17 | 1,809 | 0 | 3 | 2002 | 19–17 | 52.8% | #58 | 1,625 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2009 | 46–22 | 67.6% | #11 | 1,882 | 0 | 5 | 2003 | 23–24 | 48.9% | #41 | 1,673 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2010 | 36–21 | 63.2% | #16 | 1,820 | 0 | 5 | 2004 | 29–20 | 59.2% | #45 | 1,651 | 0 | 2 |
| 26 | 2011 | 60–26 | 69.8% | #9 | 1,907 | 0 | 7 | 2005 | 15–20 | 42.9% | #82 | 1,546 | 0 | 2 |
| 27 | 2012 | 41–25 | 62.1% | #11 | 1,814 | 0 | 7 | 2006 | 20–16 | 55.6% | #56 | 1,621 | 0 | 2 |
| 28 | 2013 | 23–15 | 60.5% | #13 | 1,808 | 1 | 8 | 2007 | 26–22 | 54.2% | #43 | 1,609 | 0 | 3 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2008 | 5–15 | 25.0% | #137 | 1,513 | 0 | 3 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2009 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #161 | 1,531 | 0 | 3 |