H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Roberta Vinci vs Anabel Medina Garrigues H2H: 1-1
Roberta Vinci and Anabel Medina Garrigues are tied 1–1 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Anabel Medina Garrigues leads 1–0 on clay, while Roberta Vinci leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Roberta Vinci won the 2010 Miami second round 6-4 7-6(5).
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 43
Right-Handed
163 cm / 5'4"
H2H
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
ESP
Age 43
Right-Handed
169 cm / 5'7"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 24, 2010* | Miami | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard | Roberta Vinci | 6-4 7-6(5) | Anabel Medina Garrigues | Match data |
| Jul 23, 2004* | Palermo | WTA 250 | R16 | Clay | Anabel Medina Garrigues | 7-6(3) 6-2 | Roberta Vinci | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Roberta Vinci | #193 | #7 | 3,615 | 1,923 | 320 | 287 | 52.7% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 8 | 10 |
| Anabel Medina Garrigues | #741 | #16 | 2,505 | 1,852 | 310 | 275 | 53.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 8 | 11 |
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 | Roberta Vinci | Anabel Medina Garrigues | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2000 | 2–5 | 28.6% | #109 | 1,494 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2001 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #168 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 | 2001 | 16–20 | 44.4% | #66 | 1,563 | 0 | 1 |
| 19 | 2002 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #184 | 1,478 | 0 | 0 | 2002 | 9–3 | 75.0% | #116 | 1,687 | 0 | 1 |
| 20 | 2003 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #119 | 1,503 | 0 | 0 | 2003 | 13–12 | 52.0% | #71 | 1,613 | 0 | 1 |
| 21 | 2004 | 4–8 | 33.3% | #116 | 1,507 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 25–22 | 53.2% | #39 | 1,716 | 0 | 2 |
| 22 | 2005 | 15–17 | 46.9% | #41 | 1,623 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 28–23 | 54.9% | #33 | 1,747 | 0 | 4 |
| 23 | 2006 | 10–16 | 38.5% | #85 | 1,576 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 34–24 | 58.6% | #27 | 1,690 | 0 | 6 |
| 24 | 2007 | 11–17 | 39.3% | #73 | 1,561 | 0 | 1 | 2007 | 25–22 | 53.2% | #34 | 1,694 | 0 | 7 |
| 25 | 2008 | 5–6 | 45.5% | #84 | 1,585 | 0 | 1 | 2008 | 41–24 | 63.1% | #22 | 1,833 | 0 | 8 |
| 26 | 2009 | 23–23 | 50.0% | #63 | 1,663 | 0 | 2 | 2009 | 33–26 | 55.9% | #27 | 1,683 | 0 | 9 |
| 27 | 2010 | 28–20 | 58.3% | #38 | 1,817 | 0 | 3 | 2010 | 18–25 | 41.9% | #71 | 1,565 | 0 | 9 |
| 28 | 2011 | 37–24 | 60.7% | #23 | 1,774 | 0 | 6 | 2011 | 35–21 | 62.5% | #27 | 1,774 | 0 | 11 |
| 29 | 2012 | 44–27 | 62.0% | #16 | 1,834 | 0 | 7 | 2012 | 23–25 | 47.9% | #50 | 1,629 | 0 | 11 |
| 30 | 2013 | 46–23 | 66.7% | #14 | 1,853 | 0 | 9 | 2013 | 8–19 | 29.6% | #100 | 1,553 | 0 | 11 |
| 31 | 2014 | 21–26 | 44.7% | #47 | 1,712 | 0 | 9 | 2014 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #452 | 1,501 | 0 | 11 |
| 32 | 2015 | 31–26 | 54.4% | #15 | 1,765 | 0 | 9 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 2016 | 28–22 | 56.0% | #18 | 1,733 | 0 | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 34 | 2017 | 10–20 | 33.3% | #116 | 1,610 | 0 | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 35 | 2018 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #193 | 1,628 | 0 | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |