H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Petra Cetkovska vs Marina Erakovic H2H: 0-2
Marina Erakovic holds a 2–0 lead over Petra Cetkovska in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Marina Erakovic leads 1–0 on grass and 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Marina Erakovic won the 2015 Birmingham second round 6-4 6-2.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
CZE
Age 41
Right-Handed
172 cm / 5'8"
H2H
0
–
2
2 main draw meetings
NZL
Age 38
Right-Handed
174 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 17, 2015* | Birmingham | WTA 500 | R64 | Grass | Marina Erakovic | 6-4 6-2 | Petra Cetkovska | Match data |
| Jan 21, 2009* | Australian Open | Grand Slam | R128 | Hard | Marina Erakovic | 6-4 7-5 | Petra Cetkovska | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Petra Cetkovska | #954 | #25 | 1,955 | 1,761 | 73 | 81 | 47.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Marina Erakovic | #827 | #39 | 1,392 | 1,701 | 105 | 131 | 44.5% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
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 | Petra Cetkovska | Marina Erakovic | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2005 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #213 | 1,498 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2007 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #153 | 1,457 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2008 | 16–16 | 50.0% | #66 | 1,531 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2009 | 4–7 | 36.4% | #227 | 1,522 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2007 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #104 | 1,501 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 2–7 | 22.2% | #333 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2008 | 12–15 | 44.4% | #83 | 1,515 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 11–8 | 57.9% | #61 | 1,630 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2009 | 7–12 | 36.8% | #149 | 1,510 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 19–20 | 48.7% | #66 | 1,600 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2010 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #143 | 1,506 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 20–16 | 55.6% | #46 | 1,673 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2011 | 15–9 | 62.5% | #31 | 1,690 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 12–20 | 37.5% | #76 | 1,609 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2012 | 17–14 | 54.8% | #55 | 1,724 | 0 | 0 | 2015 | 7–14 | 33.3% | #135 | 1,543 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2013 | 5–8 | 38.5% | #139 | 1,651 | 0 | 0 | 2016 | 11–8 | 57.9% | #106 | 1,625 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 2014 | 13–11 | 54.2% | #58 | 1,699 | 0 | 0 | 2017 | 1–9 | 10.0% | #197 | 1,551 | 0 | 1 |
| 30 | 2015 | 2–6 | 25.0% | #130 | 1,632 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 2016 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #591 | 1,598 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |