H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Shelby Rogers vs Marina Erakovic H2H: 2-1
Shelby Rogers holds a 2–1 lead over Marina Erakovic in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on hard courts, while Shelby Rogers leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Shelby Rogers won the 2017 Roland Garros first round 7-6(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 33
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H
2
–
1
3 main draw meetings
NZL
Age 38
Right-Handed
174 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 30, 2017* | Roland Garros | Grand Slam | R128 | Clay | Shelby Rogers | 7-6(4) 6-4 | Marina Erakovic | Match data |
| Mar 23, 2017* | Miami | WTA 1000 | R128 | Hard | Shelby Rogers | 4-6 6-3 7-6(4) | Marina Erakovic | Match data |
| Jul 28, 2014 | Washington | WTA 250 | R16 | Hard | Marina Erakovic | 6-2 6-2 | Shelby Rogers | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Shelby Rogers | #437 | #30 | 1,698 | 1,875 | 126 | 138 | 47.7% | 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 | Shelby Rogers | Marina Erakovic | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 2010 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #352 | 1,494 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #213 | 1,498 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2011 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #426 | 1,479 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2007 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #153 | 1,457 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2013 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #126 | 1,478 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 16–16 | 50.0% | #66 | 1,531 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2014 | 12–9 | 57.1% | #72 | 1,631 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 4–7 | 36.4% | #227 | 1,522 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2015 | 4–14 | 22.2% | #151 | 1,528 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 2–7 | 22.2% | #333 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2016 | 13–13 | 50.0% | #59 | 1,603 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 11–8 | 57.9% | #61 | 1,630 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2017 | 23–19 | 54.8% | #59 | 1,691 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 19–20 | 48.7% | #66 | 1,600 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2018 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #630 | 1,652 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 20–16 | 55.6% | #46 | 1,673 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2019 | 3–9 | 25.0% | #177 | 1,577 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 12–20 | 37.5% | #76 | 1,609 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2020 | 8–6 | 57.1% | #60 | 1,680 | 0 | 0 | 2015 | 7–14 | 33.3% | #135 | 1,543 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2021 | 28–21 | 57.1% | #40 | 1,802 | 0 | 0 | 2016 | 11–8 | 57.9% | #106 | 1,625 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 2022 | 20–19 | 51.3% | #47 | 1,820 | 0 | 0 | 2017 | 1–9 | 10.0% | #197 | 1,551 | 0 | 1 |
| 30 | 2023 | 9–13 | 40.9% | #149 | 1,778 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 2024 | 4–8 | 33.3% | #341 | 1,678 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |