H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Sara Errani vs Lindsay Davenport H2H: 0-3
Lindsay Davenport holds a 3–0 lead over Sara Errani in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Lindsay Davenport leads 3–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Lindsay Davenport won the 2008 Australian Open first round 6-2 3-6 7-5.
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 39
Right-Handed
164 cm / 5'5"
H2H
0
–
3
3 main draw meetings
USA
Age 50
Right-Handed
189 cm / 6'2"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 16, 2008* | Australian Open | Grand Slam | R128 | Hard | Lindsay Davenport | 6-2 3-6 7-5 | Sara Errani | Match data |
| Jan 5, 2008* | Auckland | WTA 250 | QF | Hard | Lindsay Davenport | 6-3 6-3 | Sara Errani | Match data |
| Sep 15, 2007* | Bali | WTA 500 | SF | Hard | Lindsay Davenport | 6-1 6-3 | Sara Errani | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sara Errani | #461 | #5 | 5,835 | 2,024 | 384 | 299 | 56.2% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 9 |
| Lindsay Davenport | #35 | #1 | 6,100 | 2,353 | 704 | 190 | 78.7% | 3 | 13 | 1 | 25 | 12 | 54 |
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 | Sara Errani | Lindsay Davenport | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1991 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #348 | 1,504 | 0 | 0 |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1992 | 2–5 | 28.6% | #161 | 1,511 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1993 | 31–15 | 67.4% | #20 | 1,858 | 0 | 1 |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1994 | 44–15 | 74.6% | #6 | 2,022 | 0 | 3 |
| 19 | 2006 | 3–3 | 50.0% | #174 | 1,529 | 0 | 0 | 1995 | 31–14 | 68.9% | #12 | 1,933 | 0 | 4 |
| 20 | 2007 | 10–7 | 58.8% | #69 | 1,615 | 0 | 0 | 1996 | 41–15 | 73.2% | #9 | 2,013 | 0 | 6 |
| 21 | 2008 | 29–21 | 58.0% | #42 | 1,747 | 0 | 2 | 1997 | 57–16 | 78.1% | #3 | 2,161 | 0 | 12 |
| 22 | 2009 | 25–27 | 48.1% | #47 | 1,656 | 0 | 2 | 1998 | 68–14 | 82.9% | #1 | 2,283 | 1 | 18 |
| 23 | 2010 | 36–29 | 55.4% | #43 | 1,720 | 0 | 2 | 1999 | 58–11 | 84.1% | #2 | 2,297 | 2 | 25 |
| 24 | 2011 | 30–26 | 53.6% | #45 | 1,671 | 0 | 2 | 2000 | 56–13 | 81.2% | #2 | 2,228 | 3 | 29 |
| 25 | 2012 | 53–19 | 73.6% | #6 | 1,901 | 0 | 6 | 2001 | 64–10 | 86.5% | #1 | 2,275 | 3 | 36 |
| 26 | 2013 | 46–22 | 67.6% | #7 | 1,894 | 0 | 7 | 2002 | 24–9 | 72.7% | #12 | 2,153 | 3 | 36 |
| 27 | 2014 | 35–23 | 60.3% | #14 | 1,773 | 0 | 7 | 2003 | 48–15 | 76.2% | #5 | 2,076 | 3 | 37 |
| 28 | 2015 | 46–26 | 63.9% | #20 | 1,752 | 0 | 8 | 2004 | 64–10 | 86.5% | #1 | 2,203 | 3 | 44 |
| 29 | 2016 | 18–21 | 46.2% | #49 | 1,625 | 0 | 9 | 2005 | 58–11 | 84.1% | #1 | 2,199 | 3 | 50 |
| 30 | 2017 | 17–15 | 53.1% | #144 | 1,650 | 0 | 9 | 2006 | 21–8 | 72.4% | #25 | 2,122 | 3 | 50 |
| 31 | 2018 | 6–8 | 42.9% | #112 | 1,765 | 0 | 9 | 2007 | 13–1 | 92.9% | #72 | 2,147 | 3 | 52 |
| 32 | 2019 | 3–7 | 30.0% | #198 | 1,567 | 0 | 9 | 2008 | 23–6 | 79.3% | #35 | 2,063 | 3 | 54 |
| 33 | 2020 | 4–3 | 57.1% | #131 | 1,604 | 0 | 9 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 34 | 2021 | 8–11 | 42.1% | #121 | 1,579 | 0 | 9 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 35 | 2022 | 2–6 | 25.0% | #109 | 1,597 | 0 | 9 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 36 | 2023 | 3–10 | 23.1% | #105 | 1,550 | 0 | 9 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 37 | 2024 | 10–13 | 43.5% | #105 | 1,699 | 0 | 9 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 38 | 2025 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #461 | 1,594 | 0 | 9 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |