H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 08:25 UTC
Rachel Mcquillan vs Erika De Lone H2H: 0-1
Erika De Lone holds a 1–0 lead over Rachel Mcquillan in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Erika De Lone leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Erika De Lone won the 1993 Hong Kong fourth round 6-4 2-6 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.
AUS
Age 54
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
USA
Age 53
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 17, 1993* | Hong Kong | WTA 250 | R16 | Hard | Erika De Lone | 6-4 2-6 6-4 | Rachel Mcquillan | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rachel Mcquillan | #971 | #28 | 582 | 1,826 | 163 | 195 | 45.5% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Erika De Lone | #425 | #65 | 501 | 1,603 | 42 | 100 | 29.6% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
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 | Rachel Mcquillan | Erika De Lone | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | 1988 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #159 | 1,525 | 0 | 0 | 1989 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #298 | 1,472 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 1989 | 13–15 | 46.4% | #79 | 1,624 | 0 | 0 | 1990 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #138 | 1,502 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 1990 | 27–21 | 56.2% | #39 | 1,709 | 0 | 0 | 1991 | 9–14 | 39.1% | #110 | 1,558 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1991 | 26–20 | 56.5% | #36 | 1,744 | 0 | 0 | 1992 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #175 | 1,526 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1992 | 18–13 | 58.1% | #38 | 1,752 | 0 | 0 | 1993 | 5–9 | 35.7% | #183 | 1,515 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1993 | 13–23 | 36.1% | #115 | 1,573 | 0 | 0 | 1994 | 1–9 | 10.0% | #200 | 1,436 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1994 | 20–17 | 54.1% | #61 | 1,650 | 0 | 0 | 1995 | 4–9 | 30.8% | #124 | 1,482 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 1995 | 13–16 | 44.8% | #69 | 1,668 | 0 | 0 | 1996 | 2–7 | 22.2% | #131 | 1,449 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 1996 | 2–9 | 18.2% | #186 | 1,568 | 0 | 0 | 1997 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #149 | 1,442 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 1997 | 10–10 | 50.0% | #48 | 1,647 | 0 | 0 | 1998 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #178 | 1,443 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 1998 | 3–15 | 16.7% | #185 | 1,529 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 5–7 | 41.7% | #67 | 1,500 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 1999 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #160 | 1,521 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 7–18 | 28.0% | #118 | 1,484 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2000 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #107 | 1,464 | 0 | 0 | 2001 | 0–5 | 0.0% | #180 | 1,428 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2001 | 12–17 | 41.4% | #79 | 1,507 | 0 | 0 | 2002 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #165 | 1,422 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2002 | 2–7 | 22.2% | #178 | 1,462 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 2003 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #355 | 1,453 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |