H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 16:32 UTC
Rebecca Marino vs Ana Ivanovic H2H: 0-1
Ana Ivanovic holds a 1–0 lead over Rebecca Marino in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Ana Ivanovic leads 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Ana Ivanovic won the 2011 Birmingham fourth round 6-3 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.
CAN
Age 35
Right-Handed
183 cm / 6'0"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
SRB
Age 38
Right-Handed
184 cm / 6'0"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 10, 2011* | Birmingham | WTA 250 | R16 | Grass | Ana Ivanovic | 6-3 6-2 | Rebecca Marino | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rebecca Marino | #361 | #38 | 1,322 | 1,726 | 48 | 77 | 38.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Ana Ivanovic | #63 | #1 | 6,912 | 2,095 | 419 | 213 | 66.3% | 1 | 3 | 2 | 7 | 2 | 15 |
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 | Rebecca Marino | Ana Ivanovic | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2004 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #101 | 1,544 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 2008 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #356 | 1,502 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 32–14 | 69.6% | #16 | 1,847 | 0 | 1 |
| 18 | 2009 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #178 | 1,503 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 36–18 | 66.7% | #14 | 1,900 | 0 | 2 |
| 19 | 2010 | 3–2 | 60.0% | #104 | 1,550 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 49–17 | 74.2% | #4 | 2,034 | 0 | 5 |
| 20 | 2011 | 14–19 | 42.4% | #64 | 1,561 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 38–16 | 70.4% | #5 | 1,975 | 1 | 8 |
| 21 | 2012 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #420 | 1,531 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 22–14 | 61.1% | #21 | 1,825 | 1 | 8 |
| 22 | 2013 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #418 | 1,522 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 33–18 | 64.7% | #17 | 1,938 | 1 | 10 |
| 23 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2011 | 32–20 | 61.5% | #22 | 1,877 | 1 | 11 |
| 24 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2012 | 33–18 | 64.7% | #13 | 1,872 | 1 | 11 |
| 25 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2013 | 38–23 | 62.3% | #16 | 1,855 | 1 | 11 |
| 26 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2014 | 59–18 | 76.6% | #5 | 2,019 | 1 | 15 |
| 27 | 2018 | 2–1 | 66.7% | #215 | 1,548 | 0 | 0 | 2015 | 29–19 | 60.4% | #16 | 1,857 | 1 | 15 |
| 28 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2016 | 15–14 | 51.7% | #63 | 1,702 | 1 | 15 |
| 30 | 2021 | 4–5 | 44.4% | #145 | 1,561 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 2022 | 12–14 | 46.2% | #63 | 1,688 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 2023 | 7–18 | 28.0% | #176 | 1,587 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 2024 | 1–6 | 14.3% | #102 | 1,683 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 34 | 2025 | 3–6 | 33.3% | #178 | 1,627 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |