H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Monica Niculescu vs Lourdes Domínguez Lino H2H: 0-1
Lourdes Domínguez Lino holds a 1–0 lead over Monica Niculescu in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Lourdes Domínguez Lino leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Lourdes Domínguez Lino won the 2012 Madrid second round 6-0 7-6(6).
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
ROU
Age 38
Right-Handed
168 cm / 5'6"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
ESP
Age 45
Right-Handed
163 cm / 5'4"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 9, 2012* | Madrid | WTA 1000 | R64 | Clay | Lourdes Domínguez Lino | 6-0 7-6(6) | Monica Niculescu | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Monica Niculescu | #958 | #28 | 1,960 | 1,807 | 176 | 213 | 45.2% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
| Lourdes Domínguez Lino | #1,129 | #40 | 1,305 | 1,674 | 125 | 157 | 44.3% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
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 | Monica Niculescu | Lourdes Domínguez Lino | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 19 | 2007 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #152 | 1,490 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #141 | 1,489 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2008 | 8–15 | 34.8% | #48 | 1,542 | 0 | 0 | 2001 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #378 | 1,479 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2009 | 10–22 | 31.2% | #103 | 1,522 | 0 | 0 | 2002 | 4–3 | 57.1% | #390 | 1,518 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2010 | 6–9 | 40.0% | #82 | 1,573 | 0 | 0 | 2003 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #319 | 1,503 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2011 | 21–15 | 58.3% | #30 | 1,755 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #208 | 1,508 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2012 | 15–23 | 39.5% | #58 | 1,639 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 6–4 | 60.0% | #72 | 1,553 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2013 | 22–21 | 51.2% | #59 | 1,637 | 0 | 1 | 2006 | 21–19 | 52.5% | #52 | 1,622 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2014 | 22–19 | 53.7% | #46 | 1,687 | 0 | 2 | 2007 | 16–21 | 43.2% | #71 | 1,558 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2015 | 20–21 | 48.8% | #39 | 1,677 | 0 | 2 | 2008 | 6–11 | 35.3% | #91 | 1,521 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2016 | 25–17 | 59.5% | #38 | 1,782 | 0 | 3 | 2009 | 6–13 | 31.6% | #134 | 1,484 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 2017 | 10–19 | 34.5% | #77 | 1,618 | 0 | 3 | 2010 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #85 | 1,493 | 0 | 1 |
| 30 | 2018 | 9–15 | 37.5% | #99 | 1,588 | 0 | 3 | 2011 | 16–16 | 50.0% | #79 | 1,583 | 0 | 2 |
| 31 | 2019 | 8–11 | 42.1% | #118 | 1,627 | 0 | 3 | 2012 | 16–16 | 50.0% | #48 | 1,653 | 0 | 2 |
| 32 | 2020 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #144 | 1,579 | 0 | 3 | 2013 | 17–22 | 43.6% | #69 | 1,620 | 0 | 2 |
| 33 | 2021 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #274 | 1,514 | 0 | 3 | 2014 | 7–11 | 38.9% | #110 | 1,570 | 0 | 2 |
| 34 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2015 | 4–5 | 44.4% | #100 | 1,552 | 0 | 2 |
| 35 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2016 | 3–8 | 27.3% | #220 | 1,517 | 0 | 2 |