H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Marion Bartoli vs Lilia Osterloh H2H: 1-1
Marion Bartoli and Lilia Osterloh are tied 1–1 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on hard courts. Most recently, Lilia Osterloh won the 2007 Stanford fourth round 5-7 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.
FRA
Age 41
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
USA
Age 48
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 27, 2007* | Stanford | WTA 500 | R16 | Hard | Lilia Osterloh | 5-7 6-4 6-3 | Marion Bartoli | Match data |
| Nov 4, 2006* | Quebec City | WTA 500 | SF | Hard | Marion Bartoli | 3-6 6-3 6-1 | Lilia Osterloh | 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 |
| Lilia Osterloh | #1,223 | #41 | 738 | 1,697 | 83 | 138 | 37.6% | 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 | Marion Bartoli | Lilia Osterloh | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1996 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #195 | 1,518 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2004 | 26–23 | 53.1% | #41 | 1,666 | 0 | 0 | 1997 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #170 | 1,551 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2005 | 26–25 | 51.0% | #37 | 1,632 | 0 | 0 | 1998 | 0–5 | 0.0% | #120 | 1,501 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2006 | 45–28 | 61.6% | #18 | 1,800 | 0 | 3 | 1999 | 9–13 | 40.9% | #79 | 1,545 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2007 | 47–31 | 60.3% | #10 | 1,873 | 0 | 3 | 2000 | 15–19 | 44.1% | #43 | 1,595 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2008 | 30–26 | 53.6% | #17 | 1,809 | 0 | 3 | 2001 | 23–25 | 47.9% | #53 | 1,659 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2009 | 46–22 | 67.6% | #11 | 1,882 | 0 | 5 | 2002 | 7–18 | 28.0% | #156 | 1,535 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2010 | 36–21 | 63.2% | #16 | 1,820 | 0 | 5 | 2003 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #180 | 1,509 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2011 | 60–26 | 69.8% | #9 | 1,907 | 0 | 7 | 2004 | 4–5 | 44.4% | #119 | 1,561 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2012 | 41–25 | 62.1% | #11 | 1,814 | 0 | 7 | 2005 | 2–9 | 18.2% | #144 | 1,488 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2013 | 23–15 | 60.5% | #13 | 1,808 | 1 | 8 | 2006 | 6–8 | 42.9% | #118 | 1,509 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2007 | 7–12 | 36.8% | #91 | 1,543 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2008 | 3–10 | 23.1% | #230 | 1,486 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2009 | 3–3 | 50.0% | #136 | 1,510 | 0 | 0 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2010 | 1–6 | 14.3% | #237 | 1,467 | 0 | 0 |