H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Nadia Petrova vs Lourdes Domínguez Lino H2H: 1-0
Nadia Petrova holds a 1–0 lead over Lourdes Domínguez Lino in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Nadia Petrova leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Nadia Petrova won the 2012 Seoul 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.
RUS
Age 44
Right-Handed
178 cm / 5'10"
H2H
1
–
0
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 20, 2012* | Seoul | WTA 250 | R32 | Hard | Nadia Petrova | 6-2 6-4 | Lourdes Domínguez Lino | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nadia Petrova | #578 | #3 | 3,882 | 2,077 | 441 | 276 | 61.5% | 0 | 3 | 1 | 7 | 2 | 13 |
| 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 | Nadia Petrova | Lourdes Domínguez Lino | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | 1998 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #145 | 1,536 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 1999 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #93 | 1,568 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 2000 | 12–15 | 44.4% | #60 | 1,624 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 2001 | 20–21 | 48.8% | #39 | 1,682 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #141 | 1,489 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2002 | 7–5 | 58.3% | #112 | 1,758 | 0 | 0 | 2001 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #378 | 1,479 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2003 | 36–20 | 64.3% | #12 | 1,924 | 0 | 0 | 2002 | 4–3 | 57.1% | #390 | 1,518 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2004 | 39–24 | 61.9% | #12 | 1,880 | 0 | 0 | 2003 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #319 | 1,503 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2005 | 56–25 | 69.1% | #9 | 1,945 | 0 | 1 | 2004 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #208 | 1,508 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2006 | 48–19 | 71.6% | #6 | 1,990 | 0 | 6 | 2005 | 6–4 | 60.0% | #72 | 1,553 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2007 | 37–18 | 67.3% | #14 | 1,931 | 0 | 7 | 2006 | 21–19 | 52.5% | #52 | 1,622 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2008 | 47–24 | 66.2% | #11 | 1,923 | 0 | 9 | 2007 | 16–21 | 43.2% | #71 | 1,558 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2009 | 30–21 | 58.8% | #20 | 1,821 | 0 | 9 | 2008 | 6–11 | 35.3% | #91 | 1,521 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2010 | 32–20 | 61.5% | #15 | 1,828 | 0 | 9 | 2009 | 6–13 | 31.6% | #134 | 1,484 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 2011 | 25–21 | 54.3% | #29 | 1,781 | 0 | 10 | 2010 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #85 | 1,493 | 0 | 1 |
| 30 | 2012 | 37–18 | 67.3% | #12 | 1,917 | 0 | 13 | 2011 | 16–16 | 50.0% | #79 | 1,583 | 0 | 2 |
| 31 | 2013 | 9–13 | 40.9% | #104 | 1,718 | 0 | 13 | 2012 | 16–16 | 50.0% | #48 | 1,653 | 0 | 2 |
| 32 | 2014 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #362 | 1,648 | 0 | 13 | 2013 | 17–22 | 43.6% | #69 | 1,620 | 0 | 2 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 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 |