H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Rita Grande vs Rachel Mcquillan H2H: 2-0
Rita Grande holds a 2–0 lead over Rachel Mcquillan in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Rita Grande leads 2–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Rita Grande won the 2001 Hobart third round 6-2 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.
ITA
Age 51
Right-Handed
177 cm / 5'10"
H2H
2
–
0
2 main draw meetings
AUS
Age 54
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 10, 2001* | Hobart | WTA 250 | R32 | Hard | Rita Grande | 6-2 6-2 | Rachel Mcquillan | Match data |
| Apr 13, 1995* | Tokyo | WTA 500 | R32 | Hard | Rita Grande | 1-6 6-3 6-3 | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rita Grande | #1,172 | #24 | 1,020 | 1,755 | 172 | 218 | 44.1% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
| Rachel Mcquillan | #971 | #28 | 582 | 1,826 | 163 | 195 | 45.5% | 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 | Rachel Mcquillan | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1988 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #159 | 1,525 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1989 | 13–15 | 46.4% | #79 | 1,624 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 1993 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #186 | 1,456 | 0 | 0 | 1990 | 27–21 | 56.2% | #39 | 1,709 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1994 | 7–12 | 36.8% | #146 | 1,491 | 0 | 0 | 1991 | 26–20 | 56.5% | #36 | 1,744 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1995 | 10–11 | 47.6% | #72 | 1,591 | 0 | 0 | 1992 | 18–13 | 58.1% | #38 | 1,752 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1996 | 10–15 | 40.0% | #71 | 1,627 | 0 | 0 | 1993 | 13–23 | 36.1% | #115 | 1,573 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1997 | 15–18 | 45.5% | #44 | 1,676 | 0 | 0 | 1994 | 20–17 | 54.1% | #61 | 1,650 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 1998 | 12–23 | 34.3% | #59 | 1,584 | 0 | 0 | 1995 | 13–16 | 44.8% | #69 | 1,668 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 1999 | 21–18 | 53.8% | #54 | 1,679 | 0 | 0 | 1996 | 2–9 | 18.2% | #186 | 1,568 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2000 | 15–21 | 41.7% | #77 | 1,602 | 0 | 0 | 1997 | 10–10 | 50.0% | #48 | 1,647 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2001 | 35–26 | 57.4% | #24 | 1,742 | 0 | 2 | 1998 | 3–15 | 16.7% | #185 | 1,529 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2002 | 21–27 | 43.8% | #46 | 1,641 | 0 | 2 | 1999 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #160 | 1,521 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2003 | 14–25 | 35.9% | #70 | 1,534 | 0 | 3 | 2000 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #107 | 1,464 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2004 | 12–18 | 40.0% | #104 | 1,536 | 0 | 3 | 2001 | 12–17 | 41.4% | #79 | 1,507 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2005 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #1088 | 1,518 | 0 | 3 | 2002 | 2–7 | 22.2% | #178 | 1,462 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2003 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #355 | 1,453 | 0 | 0 |