H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 17:48 UTC
Mary Lou Piatek vs Iva Budarova H2H: 1-1
Mary Lou Piatek and Iva Budarova are tied 1–1 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Mary Lou Piatek leads 1–0 on carpet, while Iva Budarova leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Iva Budarova won the 1982 Mahwah second round 6-3 6-1.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 25, 1982* | Mahwah | WTA 250 | R64 | Hard | Iva Budarova | 6-3 6-1 | Mary Lou Piatek | Match data |
| Mar 11, 1982* | Dallas | WTA 250 | R32 | Carpet | Mary Lou Piatek | 6-1 6-1 | Iva Budarova | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mary Lou Piatek | — | — | — | 1,936 | 153 | 206 | 42.6% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| Iva Budarova | #661 | #25 | 9 | 1,859 | 148 | 206 | 41.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 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.
| Mary Lou Piatek | Iva Budarova | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles |
| 1978 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,499 | 0 | 0 | 1977 | 1–1 | 50.0% | — | 1,510 | 0 | 0 |
| 1979 | 3–5 | 37.5% | — | 1,546 | 0 | 0 | 1978 | 4–6 | 40.0% | — | 1,512 | 0 | 0 |
| 1980 | 16–12 | 57.1% | — | 1,737 | 0 | 0 | 1979 | 15–13 | 53.6% | — | 1,655 | 0 | 3 |
| 1981 | 30–22 | 57.7% | — | 1,873 | 0 | 1 | 1980 | 3–8 | 27.3% | — | 1,606 | 0 | 3 |
| 1982 | 18–21 | 46.2% | — | 1,792 | 0 | 1 | 1981 | 2–14 | 12.5% | — | 1,544 | 0 | 3 |
| 1983 | 12–20 | 37.5% | — | 1,721 | 0 | 1 | 1982 | 14–19 | 42.4% | — | 1,656 | 0 | 3 |
| 1984 | 18–20 | 47.4% | — | 1,703 | 0 | 2 | 1983 | 33–23 | 58.9% | — | 1,734 | 0 | 3 |
| 1985 | 14–18 | 43.8% | — | 1,678 | 0 | 2 | 1984 | 18–22 | 45.0% | #56 | 1,705 | 0 | 3 |
| 1986 | 8–15 | 34.8% | — | 1,619 | 0 | 2 | 1985 | 19–23 | 45.2% | #68 | 1,727 | 0 | 3 |
| 1987 | 6–12 | 33.3% | — | 1,594 | 0 | 2 | 1986 | 11–24 | 31.4% | #112 | 1,587 | 0 | 3 |
| 1988 | 6–16 | 27.3% | — | 1,542 | 0 | 2 | 1987 | 6–14 | 30.0% | #116 | 1,563 | 0 | 3 |
| 1989 | 7–15 | 31.8% | — | 1,593 | 0 | 2 | 1988 | 12–18 | 40.0% | #105 | 1,586 | 0 | 3 |
| 1990 | 8–11 | 42.1% | — | 1,612 | 0 | 2 | 1989 | 7–14 | 33.3% | #141 | 1,560 | 0 | 3 |
| 1991 | 5–8 | 38.5% | — | 1,630 | 0 | 2 | 1990 | 3–7 | 30.0% | #186 | 1,534 | 0 | 3 |
| 1992 | 1–8 | 11.1% | — | 1,560 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 1993 | 1–2 | 33.3% | — | 1,555 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |