H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 04:30 UTC
Sachia Vickery vs Marina Erakovic H2H: 0-1
Marina Erakovic holds a 1–0 lead over Sachia Vickery in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Marina Erakovic leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Marina Erakovic won the 2016 Bol fourth round 6-4 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.
USA
Age 31
Right-Handed
163 cm / 5'4"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
NZL
Age 38
Right-Handed
174 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 3, 2016* | Bol | WTA 250 | R16 | Clay | Marina Erakovic | 6-4 6-4 | Sachia Vickery | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sachia Vickery | #417 | #73 | 833 | 1,699 | 38 | 56 | 40.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Marina Erakovic | #827 | #39 | 1,392 | 1,701 | 105 | 131 | 44.5% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
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 | Sachia Vickery | Marina Erakovic | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2005 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #213 | 1,498 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2013 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #199 | 1,502 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 2014 | 2–5 | 28.6% | #189 | 1,491 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #153 | 1,457 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2015 | 5–7 | 41.7% | #129 | 1,503 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 16–16 | 50.0% | #66 | 1,531 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2016 | 5–6 | 45.5% | #138 | 1,521 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 4–7 | 36.4% | #227 | 1,522 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2017 | 5–5 | 50.0% | #120 | 1,561 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 2–7 | 22.2% | #333 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2018 | 9–10 | 47.4% | #101 | 1,627 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 11–8 | 57.9% | #61 | 1,630 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2019 | 4–7 | 36.4% | #157 | 1,569 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 19–20 | 48.7% | #66 | 1,600 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2020 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #158 | 1,586 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 20–16 | 55.6% | #46 | 1,673 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2021 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #221 | 1,509 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 12–20 | 37.5% | #76 | 1,609 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2022 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #184 | 1,527 | 0 | 0 | 2015 | 7–14 | 33.3% | #135 | 1,543 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2023 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #146 | 1,571 | 0 | 0 | 2016 | 11–8 | 57.9% | #106 | 1,625 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 2024 | 2–6 | 25.0% | #201 | 1,575 | 0 | 0 | 2017 | 1–9 | 10.0% | #197 | 1,551 | 0 | 1 |