H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Rita Grande vs Miho Saeki H2H: 0-1
Miho Saeki holds a 1–0 lead over Rita Grande in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Miho Saeki leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Miho Saeki won the 1997 Key Biscayne first round 0-6 6-1 6-3.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
ITA
Age 51
Right-Handed
177 cm / 5'10"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
JPN
Age 50
Right-Handed
168 cm / 5'6"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 21, 1997* | Key Biscayne | WTA 1000 | R128 | Hard | Miho Saeki | 0-6 6-1 6-3 | Rita Grande | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rita Grande | #1,172 | #24 | 1,020 | 1,755 | 172 | 218 | 44.1% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
| Miho Saeki | #884 | #56 | 461 | 1,579 | 26 | 57 | 31.3% | 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 | Rita Grande | Miho Saeki | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | 1991 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #370 | 1,471 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 1993 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #186 | 1,456 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 1994 | 7–12 | 36.8% | #146 | 1,491 | 0 | 0 | 1995 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #234 | 1,480 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1995 | 10–11 | 47.6% | #72 | 1,591 | 0 | 0 | 1996 | 3–7 | 30.0% | #120 | 1,487 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1996 | 10–15 | 40.0% | #71 | 1,627 | 0 | 0 | 1997 | 5–12 | 29.4% | #76 | 1,488 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1997 | 15–18 | 45.5% | #44 | 1,676 | 0 | 0 | 1998 | 9–15 | 37.5% | #89 | 1,512 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 1998 | 12–23 | 34.3% | #59 | 1,584 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 6–11 | 35.3% | #119 | 1,526 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 1999 | 21–18 | 53.8% | #54 | 1,679 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 25 | 2000 | 15–21 | 41.7% | #77 | 1,602 | 0 | 0 | 2001 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #179 | 1,501 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2001 | 35–26 | 57.4% | #24 | 1,742 | 0 | 2 | 2002 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #201 | 1,500 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2002 | 21–27 | 43.8% | #46 | 1,641 | 0 | 2 | 2003 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #256 | 1,473 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2003 | 14–25 | 35.9% | #70 | 1,534 | 0 | 3 | 2004 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #260 | 1,489 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2004 | 12–18 | 40.0% | #104 | 1,536 | 0 | 3 | 2005 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #210 | 1,473 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2005 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #1088 | 1,518 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |