H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Mary Lou Piatek vs Patricia Medrado H2H: 3-1
Mary Lou Piatek holds a 3–1 lead over Patricia Medrado in their WTA head-to-head. Across 4 main-draw meetings, Mary Lou Piatek leads 2–0 on carpet, while they are tied 1–1 on hard courts. Most recently, Mary Lou Piatek won the 1985 San Diego third round 6-2 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.
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 25, 1985* | San Diego | WTA 500 | R32 | Hard | Mary Lou Piatek | 6-2 6-4 | Patricia Medrado | Match data |
| Feb 6, 1985* | Delray Beach | WTA 1000 | R128 | Hard | Patricia Medrado | 6-3 6-0 | Mary Lou Piatek | Match data |
| Feb 19, 1982* | Houston | WTA 250 | R16 | Carpet | Mary Lou Piatek | 6-3 6-2 | Patricia Medrado | Match data |
| Feb 12, 1982* | Kansas City | WTA 250 | R16 | Carpet | Mary Lou Piatek | 6-1 6-4 | Patricia Medrado | 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 |
| Patricia Medrado | #359 | #67 | 9 | 1,837 | 152 | 163 | 48.3% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 10 |
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 | Patricia Medrado | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1975 | 3–1 | 75.0% | — | 1,535 | 0 | 0 |
| 1979 | 3–5 | 37.5% | — | 1,546 | 0 | 0 | 1976 | 0–2 | 0.0% | — | 1,516 | 0 | 0 |
| 1980 | 16–12 | 57.1% | — | 1,737 | 0 | 0 | 1977 | 2–3 | 40.0% | — | 1,527 | 0 | 1 |
| 1981 | 30–22 | 57.7% | — | 1,873 | 0 | 1 | 1978 | 6–11 | 35.3% | — | 1,582 | 0 | 1 |
| 1982 | 18–21 | 46.2% | — | 1,792 | 0 | 1 | 1979 | 3–6 | 33.3% | — | 1,600 | 0 | 1 |
| 1983 | 12–20 | 37.5% | — | 1,721 | 0 | 1 | 1980 | 22–10 | 68.8% | — | 1,649 | 0 | 4 |
| 1984 | 18–20 | 47.4% | — | 1,703 | 0 | 2 | 1981 | 38–20 | 65.5% | — | 1,740 | 0 | 8 |
| 1985 | 14–18 | 43.8% | — | 1,678 | 0 | 2 | 1982 | 33–25 | 56.9% | — | 1,779 | 0 | 10 |
| 1986 | 8–15 | 34.8% | — | 1,619 | 0 | 2 | 1983 | 4–18 | 18.2% | — | 1,577 | 0 | 10 |
| 1987 | 6–12 | 33.3% | — | 1,594 | 0 | 2 | 1984 | 11–15 | 42.3% | #108 | 1,588 | 0 | 10 |
| 1988 | 6–16 | 27.3% | — | 1,542 | 0 | 2 | 1985 | 8–14 | 36.4% | #108 | 1,542 | 0 | 10 |
| 1989 | 7–15 | 31.8% | — | 1,593 | 0 | 2 | 1986 | 12–14 | 46.2% | #76 | 1,562 | 0 | 10 |
| 1990 | 8–11 | 42.1% | — | 1,612 | 0 | 2 | 1987 | 6–13 | 31.6% | #117 | 1,552 | 0 | 10 |
| 1991 | 5–8 | 38.5% | — | 1,630 | 0 | 2 | 1988 | 4–11 | 26.7% | #180 | 1,474 | 0 | 10 |
| 1992 | 1–8 | 11.1% | — | 1,560 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 1993 | 1–2 | 33.3% | — | 1,555 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |