H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 17:48 UTC
Sílvia Soler-Espinosa vs Romina Oprandi H2H: 1-0
Sílvia Soler-Espinosa holds a 1–0 lead over Romina Oprandi in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Sílvia Soler-Espinosa leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Sílvia Soler-Espinosa won the 2016 Rio de Janeiro third round 6-1 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.
ESP
Age 38
Right-Handed
169 cm / 5'7"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
SUI
Age 40
Right-Handed
172 cm / 5'8"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 16, 2016 | Rio de Janeiro | WTA 250 | R32 | Clay | Sílvia Soler-Espinosa | 6-1 6-2 | Romina Oprandi | Match data |
Career Comparison
| Player | Current | Peak | Pts | Elo | W | L | Win % | GS | 1000 | Finals | 500 | 250 | Titles |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sílvia Soler-Espinosa | #858 | #54 | 1,157 | 1,643 | 56 | 102 | 35.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Romina Oprandi | #895 | #32 | 1,490 | 1,694 | 54 | 88 | 38.0% | 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 | Sílvia Soler-Espinosa | Romina Oprandi | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2005 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #187 | 1,487 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2006 | 7–7 | 50.0% | #53 | 1,538 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2009 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #183 | 1,473 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 5–14 | 26.3% | #256 | 1,490 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2010 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #167 | 1,470 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 23 | 2011 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #81 | 1,517 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #215 | 1,477 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2012 | 13–17 | 43.3% | #83 | 1,581 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 4–5 | 44.4% | #66 | 1,515 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2013 | 12–20 | 37.5% | #82 | 1,526 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 6–14 | 30.0% | #82 | 1,521 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2014 | 17–22 | 43.6% | #66 | 1,566 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 9–14 | 39.1% | #61 | 1,556 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2015 | 3–14 | 17.6% | #145 | 1,490 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 13–13 | 50.0% | #78 | 1,624 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2016 | 5–6 | 45.5% | #128 | 1,490 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 9–14 | 39.1% | #114 | 1,569 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2017 | 1–7 | 12.5% | #225 | 1,492 | 0 | 0 | 2015 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #124 | 1,559 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2018 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #190 | 1,543 | 0 | 0 | 2016 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #397 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | 2019 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #681 | 1,547 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |