H2H data updated: 2026-09-14 00:00 UTC

Su-Wei Hsieh vs Marina Erakovic H2H: 0-1

Marina Erakovic holds a 1–0 lead over Su-Wei Hsieh in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Marina Erakovic leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Marina Erakovic won the 2013 Pattaya round of 32 6-2 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.

Su-Wei Hsieh
Chinese Taipei Age 40 Right-Handed 169 cm / 5'7"
H2H
0 – 1
1 main-draw meetings
Marina Erakovic
New Zealand Age 38 Right-Handed 174 cm / 5'9"

H2H Match Log

PlayerScorePlayerMatch DataDateRoundTournamentCategorySurface
Marina Erakovic #75 6-2 6-2 Su-Wei Hsieh #25 Match data Jan 31, 2013* R32 Pattaya International → modern equivalent WTA 250 Hard

Estimated match date where the exact historical date is unavailable. Arrows show an edition's recorded category and documented modern equivalent; unresolved editions keep their recorded category. Asterisked totals include editions mapped from documented historical predecessor categories. Mapping details.

Career Comparison

Player Current Peak Pts Elo W L Win % GS 1000 including documented historical predecessor categories Finals 500 including documented historical predecessor categories 250 including documented historical predecessor categories Titles
Su-Wei Hsieh #909 #23 1,960 1,880 153 176 46.5% 0 0 0 0 3 3
Marina Erakovic #827 #39 1,392 1,695 104 133 43.9% 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 Su-Wei Hsieh Marina Erakovic
YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles
15 2001 5–2 71.4% #164 1,548 0 0 — — — — — — —
16 2002 0–1 0.0% #267 1,540 0 0 — — — — — — —
17 — — — — — — — 2005 1–1 50.0% #213 1,498 0 0
19 2005 0–3 0.0% #142 1,506 0 0 2007 1–5 16.7% #153 1,457 0 0
20 2006 0–4 0.0% #129 1,462 0 0 2008 16–17 48.5% #66 1,517 0 0
21 2007 1–7 12.5% #157 1,419 0 0 2009 4–7 36.4% #227 1,514 0 0
22 2008 5–8 38.5% #81 1,483 0 0 2010 2–7 22.2% #333 1,480 0 0
23 2009 1–2 33.3% #314 1,473 0 0 2011 11–8 57.9% #61 1,627 0 0
24 2010 0–2 0.0% #362 1,454 0 0 2012 19–21 47.5% #66 1,583 0 0
25 2011 1–1 50.0% #172 1,458 0 0 2013 20–16 55.6% #46 1,669 0 1
26 2012 22–14 61.1% #25 1,672 0 2 2014 12–20 37.5% #76 1,607 0 1
27 2013 13–25 34.2% #86 1,554 0 2 2015 7–14 33.3% #135 1,542 0 1
28 2014 6–12 33.3% #141 1,542 0 2 2016 10–8 55.6% #106 1,620 0 1
29 2015 6–5 54.5% #93 1,581 0 2 2017 1–9 10.0% #197 1,547 0 1
30 2016 12–12 50.0% #87 1,586 0 2 — — — — — — —
31 2017 8–15 34.8% #82 1,600 0 2 — — — — — — —
32 2018 32–17 65.3% #28 1,778 0 3 — — — — — — —
33 2019 31–24 56.4% #32 1,781 0 3 — — — — — — —
34 2020 1–7 12.5% #67 1,706 0 3 — — — — — — —
35 2021 9–14 39.1% #108 1,686 0 3 — — — — — — —
37 2023 0–1 0.0% #713 1,658 0 3 — — — — — — —

Surface Results by Age

Seasons are aligned by the age each player spent most of that calendar year. Results cover completed main-draw matches. Bold green marks the higher win percentage when both players have at least 5 matches on that surface at the aligned age.

Age Su-Wei Hsieh Marina Erakovic
Yr HardClayGrassCarpet Yr HardClayGrassCarpet
W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win %
15 2001 5 2 7 71.4% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
16 2002 0 1 1 0.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
17 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 2005 1 1 2 50.0% — — — — — — — — — — — —
19 2005 0 3 3 0.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — 2007 1 5 6 16.7% — — — — — — — — — — — —
20 2006 0 2 2 0.0% 0 1 1 0.0% 0 1 1 0.0% — — — — 2008 8 11 19 42.1% 1 3 4 25.0% 7 3 10 70.0% — — — —
21 2007 1 5 6 16.7% 0 1 1 0.0% 0 1 1 0.0% — — — — 2009 4 7 11 36.4% — — — — — — — — — — — —
22 2008 4 4 8 50.0% 0 3 3 0.0% 1 1 2 50.0% — — — — 2010 0 6 6 0.0% — — — — 2 1 3 66.7% — — — —
23 2009 1 2 3 33.3% — — — — — — — — — — — — 2011 7 5 12 58.3% 0 1 1 0.0% 4 2 6 66.7% — — — —
24 2010 0 2 2 0.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — 2012 9 10 19 47.4% 7 7 14 50.0% 3 4 7 42.9% — — — —
25 2011 1 1 2 50.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — 2013 13 10 23 56.5% 3 4 7 42.9% 4 2 6 66.7% — — — —
26 2012 15 7 22 68.2% 2 3 5 40.0% 5 4 9 55.6% — — — — 2014 10 13 23 43.5% 2 3 5 40.0% 0 3 3 0.0% 0 1 1 0.0%
27 2013 10 18 28 35.7% 1 4 5 20.0% 2 3 5 40.0% — — — — 2015 5 6 11 45.5% 0 4 4 0.0% 2 4 6 33.3% — — — —
28 2014 6 8 14 42.9% 0 2 2 0.0% 0 2 2 0.0% — — — — 2016 1 3 4 25.0% 7 4 11 63.6% 2 1 3 66.7% — — — —
29 2015 5 3 8 62.5% 0 1 1 0.0% 1 1 2 50.0% — — — — 2017 1 6 7 14.3% 0 2 2 0.0% 0 1 1 0.0% — — — —
30 2016 6 6 12 50.0% 5 4 9 55.6% 1 2 3 33.3% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
31 2017 5 9 14 35.7% 2 2 4 50.0% 1 4 5 20.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
32 2018 21 9 30 70.0% 6 5 11 54.5% 5 3 8 62.5% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
33 2019 23 16 39 59.0% 4 5 9 44.4% 4 3 7 57.1% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
34 2020 0 5 5 0.0% 1 2 3 33.3% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
35 2021 9 9 18 50.0% 0 3 3 0.0% 0 2 2 0.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
37 2023 — — — — 0 1 1 0.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Career — 112 112 224 50.0% 21 37 58 36.2% 20 27 47 42.6% — — — — — 60 83 143 42.0% 20 28 48 41.7% 24 21 45 53.3% 0 1 1 0.0%

Performance Progression by Age

Seasons are aligned by the age each player spent most of that calendar year. Detailed serve and return statistics available for 285/321 of Su-Wei Hsieh's and 219/235 of Marina Erakovic's main draw matches. Sample is shown as matches with detailed serve and return statistics / total main draw matches. Bold green marks the stronger value when both stat samples contain at least 5 matches; lower is better for DFs/M.

Age Su-Wei Hsieh Marina Erakovic
Yr Sample Aces/M DFs/M 1st Sv% 1st Pts% 2nd Pts% BP Saved% BP Conv% Svc Pts% Ret Pts% Yr Sample Aces/M DFs/M 1st Sv% 1st Pts% 2nd Pts% BP Saved% BP Conv% Svc Pts% Ret Pts%
19 2005 1/3 0.0 1.0 68.9% 45.2% 28.6% 44.4% 0.0% 40.0% 31.9% 2007 5/6 2.4 3.6 56.9% 62.4% 42.7% 39.4% 61.3% 54.4% 41.8%
20 2006 2/4 0.0 1.5 70.8% 54.2% 53.1% 56.9% 10.7% 53.2% 36.5% 2008 29/33 5.4 3.4 58.8% 68.1% 47.4% 54.2% 45.7% 59.3% 40.8%
21 2007 3/8 0.3 3.0 58.2% 61.7% 45.8% 57.9% 26.5% 55.0% 34.9% 2009 11/11 3.8 4.9 57.0% 64.8% 38.5% 56.9% 55.6% 53.7% 40.2%
22 2008 11/13 1.1 3.7 53.2% 62.4% 43.3% 51.4% 38.7% 53.6% 42.4% 2010 9/9 4.7 4.1 61.1% 62.6% 41.2% 53.6% 51.8% 54.2% 37.6%
23 2009 3/3 0.3 3.7 58.9% 51.8% 46.8% 29.4% 52.6% 49.8% 48.1% 2011 18/19 4.4 3.1 63.9% 65.5% 44.4% 59.2% 39.3% 58.1% 42.5%
24 2010 2/2 0.5 4.0 60.9% 63.3% 38.7% 52.2% 46.3% 53.7% 43.8% 2012 38/40 3.8 3.4 54.4% 68.8% 46.5% 53.9% 42.7% 58.3% 42.6%
25 2011 2/2 0.0 2.5 62.8% 59.0% 52.3% 72.4% 57.5% 56.4% 54.5% 2013 29/36 4.2 4.9 57.0% 70.7% 45.0% 51.7% 47.3% 59.7% 44.4%
26 2012 29/36 0.6 2.5 64.5% 63.4% 48.2% 50.2% 45.6% 58.1% 47.7% 2014 31/32 2.8 3.8 60.3% 65.6% 42.5% 49.3% 46.9% 56.3% 41.9%
27 2013 33/38 0.7 3.0 62.9% 54.8% 42.6% 45.6% 49.0% 50.2% 43.3% 2015 21/21 3.8 3.6 61.0% 66.3% 50.9% 53.1% 41.0% 60.4% 38.0%
28 2014 14/18 0.9 2.6 61.9% 54.6% 40.0% 41.3% 41.6% 49.3% 42.3% 2016 18/18 2.3 4.4 64.7% 61.7% 44.5% 51.8% 50.1% 56.1% 43.0%
29 2015 7/11 2.1 2.9 61.0% 61.1% 53.7% 55.2% 49.1% 58.2% 41.7% 2017 10/10 2.0 5.6 57.0% 65.1% 39.1% 48.2% 43.8% 54.1% 36.1%
30 2016 24/24 1.1 2.6 58.5% 61.5% 47.9% 48.7% 43.8% 55.8% 43.3% — —/— — — — — — — — — —
31 2017 23/23 1.1 2.7 63.4% 56.9% 39.7% 45.0% 49.8% 50.5% 44.3% — —/— — — — — — — — — —
32 2018 46/49 0.8 3.1 63.3% 60.9% 47.5% 57.5% 54.0% 56.0% 47.2% — —/— — — — — — — — — —
33 2019 53/55 0.7 3.2 64.4% 61.9% 46.6% 51.7% 47.6% 56.5% 44.9% — —/— — — — — — — — — —
34 2020 8/8 0.1 3.0 61.2% 53.2% 42.9% 42.4% 53.9% 48.9% 40.7% — —/— — — — — — — — — —
35 2021 23/23 0.7 3.1 64.0% 55.2% 43.8% 49.8% 41.6% 51.7% 43.2% — —/— — — — — — — — — —
37 2023 1/1 1.0 2.0 64.9% 60.0% 44.4% 16.7% 45.5% 54.5% 45.5% — —/— — — — — — — — — —
Career — 285/329 0.8 2.9 62.6% 59.3% 45.3% 50.0% 47.0% 54.1% 44.5% — 219/237 3.8 3.9 59.0% 66.6% 44.9% 52.7% 46.0% 57.7% 41.4%

Advanced Statistics Comparison by Age

Seasons are aligned by the age each player spent most of that calendar year. Metrics use eligible main-draw results; point statistics use matches with detailed data. Bold green marks the stronger value when both underlying samples are sufficient. Lower is better for Schedule because a negative value means a tougher schedule. Career Schedule is normalized per 100 matches.

Age Su-Wei Hsieh Marina Erakovic
Yr Elo P+ Serve+ Return+ PD TPW% Hard Elo Clay Elo Grass Elo Set Win % Set Margin Dec. Set Tiebreak Pressure+ Schedule Yr Elo P+ Serve+ Return+ PD TPW% Hard Elo Clay Elo Grass Elo Set Win % Set Margin Dec. Set Tiebreak Pressure+ Schedule
15 2001 1548 108.6 — — — — +31 — — 63.2% +1.00 3–2 (60%) 0–2 — +1.12 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
16 2002 1541 99.3 — — — — — — — 0.0% -5.00 — — — -0.23 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
17 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 2005 1498 95.1 — — — — — — — 40.0% -1.00 1–0 — — +0.29
19 2005 1506 99.1 -0.87 -2.03 0.532 35.9% +18 — — 14.3% -2.43 0–1 0–1 — -0.18 2007 1457 98.0 -0.61 -2.50 0.916 48.2% +5 — — 21.4% -1.36 1–1 — — +0.10
20 2006 1462 97.2 -0.43 -2.06 0.780 45.6% — — — 11.1% -2.11 0–1 — — +0.03 2008 1518 119.1 +1.94 -2.96 1.003 49.8% -43 +12 +208 48.7% -0.08 6–6 (50%) 5–7 (42%) 99.1 +1.05
21 2007 1419 94.3 -0.52 -2.42 0.776 45.0% +29 — — 22.2% -2.00 0–2 0–1 — -0.15 2009 1514 108.9 -1.10 -1.98 0.869 47.5% -38 — — 42.3% -0.92 1–3 (25%) 1–0 — -0.07
22 2008 1483 115.6 -0.18 -0.54 0.915 47.9% +35 -31 — 40.0% -0.83 2–2 (50%) 1–1 — -0.39 2010 1480 102.7 -1.18 -3.79 0.820 45.9% -44 — +254 25.0% -1.70 1–1 0–3 (0%) — -0.06
23 2009 1473 99.4 -1.34 -1.35 0.959 48.9% +30 — — 33.3% -0.83 — — — +0.39 2011 1627 118.5 +1.72 -1.34 1.015 50.1% -74 — +125 55.3% +0.02 5–4 (56%) 1–0 — +0.24
24 2010 1454 101.1 -0.49 +0.07 0.946 48.5% — — — 20.0% -0.80 0–1 0–2 — -0.03 2012 1584 114.0 +1.58 -1.34 1.023 50.5% -11 -33 +124 44.0% -0.37 9–6 (60%) 5–3 (63%) 104.2 +1.89
25 2011 1459 105.4 -0.05 -0.94 1.250 55.5% — — — 60.0% +1.40 0–1 0–1 — +0.27 2013 1670 123.7 +2.86 -0.04 1.101 51.9% -29 -101 +64 53.0% +0.21 7–7 (50%) 10–4 (71%) 106.7 +0.26
26 2012 1672 133.4 +1.38 +2.74 1.138 52.7% -4 -182 -35 58.2% +0.62 7–6 (54%) 5–5 (50%) 104.4 +0.40 2014 1608 123.2 -0.48 -1.04 0.958 49.3% +12 -33 +39 40.8% -0.31 4–5 (44%) 2–2 (50%) — -0.33
27 2013 1554 116.0 -3.73 +0.15 0.871 46.8% +4 -81 +19 37.6% -1.02 3–6 (33%) 5–7 (42%) 97.2 -0.23 2015 1542 117.9 +1.24 -2.64 0.961 48.9% +77 -39 +69 44.7% -0.23 2–7 (22%) 2–3 (40%) 95.1 -0.36
28 2014 1542 107.7 -3.95 -1.33 0.834 45.9% +33 — — 35.7% -1.24 3–3 (50%) 2–4 (33%) 98.6 +0.26 2016 1620 110.9 +0.21 -1.18 0.978 49.7% -22 +11 +15 48.7% -0.26 4–3 (57%) 5–4 (56%) 102.4 +0.55
29 2015 1582 111.2 -0.41 -0.09 0.996 50.3% +31 — — 48.1% +0.04 4–1 (80%) 1–0 — +0.05 2017 1548 105.9 -0.90 -2.01 0.788 45.4% +27 — — 15.8% -1.84 0–1 0–3 (0%) — -0.44
30 2016 1586 119.0 -0.64 +0.61 0.979 49.4% -1 -70 -44 47.4% -0.11 6–3 (67%) 2–3 (40%) 103.6 -0.11 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
31 2017 1601 109.3 -4.02 +0.80 0.895 47.4% -15 -59 -29 37.0% -0.98 4–6 (40%) 3–4 (43%) 98.3 +0.19 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
32 2018 1778 132.6 -0.63 +4.07 1.073 51.5% -22 -182 -83 58.2% +0.56 12–6 (67%) 5–4 (56%) 108.9 -0.49 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
33 2019 1781 146.5 +0.12 +2.75 1.033 50.7% +29 -185 -15 52.6% +0.24 16–9 (64%) 10–8 (56%) 107.5 -1.32 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
34 2020 1707 118.1 -2.64 +0.13 0.796 44.9% +27 -121 — 17.6% -2.35 0–1 1–0 — -0.47 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
35 2021 1687 126.8 -2.62 -0.02 0.895 47.4% +64 -177 — 43.1% -0.80 3–4 (43%) 4–0 (100%) — -1.53 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
37 2023 1658 96.7 -0.52 -0.38 1.002 49.4% — — — 33.3% -0.33 0–1 0–1 — +0.20 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
38 2024 1628 102.2 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Career — 1881 128.6 -1.28 +1.43 0.970 49.3% +14 -131 -34 46.0% -0.30 63–56 (53%) 39–44 (47%) 103.9 -0.68 — 1696 119.6 +0.96 -1.64 0.979 49.6% -14 -29 +123 44.6% -0.34 41–44 (48%) 31–29 (52%) 102.9 +1.32

Career Rivalries

Each player's five most-played main-draw opponents. The current matchup is highlighted when it appears in a player's top five.