H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Marion Bartoli vs Sania Mirza H2H: 0-2
Sania Mirza holds a 2–0 lead over Marion Bartoli in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Sania Mirza leads 2–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Sania Mirza won the 2009 Osaka quarterfinal 6-4 2-0 RET.
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
0
–
2
2 main draw meetings
IND
Age 39
Right-Handed
173 cm / 5'8"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 17, 2009* | Osaka | WTA 250 | QF | Hard | Sania Mirza | 6-4 2-0 (ret.) | Marion Bartoli | Match data |
| Sep 3, 2005* | US Open | Grand Slam | R32 | Hard | Sania Mirza | 7-6(4) 6-4 | Marion Bartoli | 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 |
| Sania Mirza | #707 | #27 | 1,148 | 1,819 | 121 | 117 | 50.8% | 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.
| Age | Marion Bartoli | Sania Mirza | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 2003 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #462 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 2002 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #104 | 1,511 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #169 | 1,468 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2003 | 20–21 | 48.8% | #58 | 1,643 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 27–16 | 62.8% | #34 | 1,677 | 0 | 1 |
| 19 | 2004 | 26–23 | 53.1% | #41 | 1,666 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 20–24 | 45.5% | #65 | 1,651 | 0 | 1 |
| 20 | 2005 | 26–25 | 51.0% | #37 | 1,632 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 30–20 | 60.0% | #31 | 1,750 | 0 | 1 |
| 21 | 2006 | 45–28 | 61.6% | #18 | 1,800 | 0 | 3 | 2008 | 11–11 | 50.0% | #101 | 1,661 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 2007 | 47–31 | 60.3% | #10 | 1,873 | 0 | 3 | 2009 | 17–13 | 56.7% | #57 | 1,724 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 2008 | 30–26 | 53.6% | #17 | 1,809 | 0 | 3 | 2010 | 5–10 | 33.3% | #141 | 1,607 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 2009 | 46–22 | 67.6% | #11 | 1,882 | 0 | 5 | 2011 | 8–15 | 34.8% | #104 | 1,557 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 2010 | 36–21 | 63.2% | #16 | 1,820 | 0 | 5 | 2012 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #278 | 1,541 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2011 | 60–26 | 69.8% | #9 | 1,907 | 0 | 7 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 27 | 2012 | 41–25 | 62.1% | #11 | 1,814 | 0 | 7 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 2013 | 23–15 | 60.5% | #13 | 1,808 | 1 | 8 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |