H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 16:30 UTC
Patricia Maria Tig vs Lourdes Domínguez Lino H2H: 0-1
Lourdes Domínguez Lino holds a 1–0 lead over Patricia Maria Tig 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 2016 Bogota third round 5-7 6-4 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.
ROU
Age 31
Right-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 14, 2016* | Bogota | WTA 250 | R32 | Clay | Lourdes Domínguez Lino | 5-7 6-4 6-4 | Patricia Maria Tig | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Patricia Maria Tig | #417 | #56 | 1,284 | 1,739 | 40 | 52 | 43.5% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| 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 | Patricia Maria Tig | Lourdes Domínguez Lino | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2000 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #141 | 1,489 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2015 | 5–4 | 55.6% | #123 | 1,532 | 0 | 0 | 2001 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #378 | 1,479 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2016 | 8–12 | 40.0% | #108 | 1,520 | 0 | 0 | 2002 | 4–3 | 57.1% | #390 | 1,518 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2017 | 2–9 | 18.2% | #232 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 | 2003 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #319 | 1,503 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2004 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #208 | 1,508 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2019 | 8–4 | 66.7% | #114 | 1,652 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 6–4 | 60.0% | #72 | 1,553 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2020 | 11–5 | 68.8% | #56 | 1,724 | 0 | 1 | 2006 | 21–19 | 52.5% | #52 | 1,622 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2021 | 3–9 | 25.0% | #225 | 1,623 | 0 | 1 | 2007 | 16–21 | 43.2% | #71 | 1,558 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2008 | 6–11 | 35.3% | #91 | 1,521 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2023 | 2–7 | 22.2% | #436 | 1,535 | 0 | 1 | 2009 | 6–13 | 31.6% | #134 | 1,484 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2010 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #85 | 1,493 | 0 | 1 |
| 30 | 2025 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #400 | 1,470 | 0 | 1 | 2011 | 16–16 | 50.0% | #79 | 1,583 | 0 | 2 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2012 | 16–16 | 50.0% | #48 | 1,653 | 0 | 2 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 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 |