H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Tamarine Tanasugarn vs Emmanuelle Gagliardi H2H: 1-0
Tamarine Tanasugarn holds a 1–0 lead over Emmanuelle Gagliardi in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Tamarine Tanasugarn leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Tamarine Tanasugarn won the 2002 Doha third round 7-5 7-6(4).
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
THA
Age 49
Right-Handed
165 cm / 5'5"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
SUI
Age 50
Right-Handed
171 cm / 5'7"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 14, 2002* | Doha | WTA 1000 | R32 | Hard | Tamarine Tanasugarn | 7-5 7-6(4) | Emmanuelle Gagliardi | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tamarine Tanasugarn | #947 | #19 | 1,508 | 1,818 | 267 | 273 | 49.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 4 |
| Emmanuelle Gagliardi | #736 | #42 | 781 | 1,695 | 117 | 182 | 39.1% | 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 | Tamarine Tanasugarn | Emmanuelle Gagliardi | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | 1993 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #407 | 1,482 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 1994 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #227 | 1,492 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 1995 | 2–5 | 28.6% | #213 | 1,478 | 0 | 0 | 1995 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #229 | 1,464 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1996 | 9–5 | 64.3% | #75 | 1,609 | 0 | 0 | 1996 | 2–1 | 66.7% | #123 | 1,504 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1997 | 18–20 | 47.4% | #47 | 1,647 | 0 | 0 | 1997 | 7–9 | 43.8% | #78 | 1,531 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1998 | 20–21 | 48.8% | #37 | 1,701 | 0 | 0 | 1998 | 5–12 | 29.4% | #101 | 1,497 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1999 | 8–13 | 38.1% | #71 | 1,634 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 11–14 | 44.0% | #68 | 1,563 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2000 | 30–18 | 62.5% | #28 | 1,787 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 12–19 | 38.7% | #95 | 1,550 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2001 | 24–21 | 53.3% | #29 | 1,697 | 0 | 0 | 2001 | 10–17 | 37.0% | #69 | 1,548 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2002 | 32–26 | 55.2% | #28 | 1,676 | 0 | 0 | 2002 | 19–23 | 45.2% | #61 | 1,583 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2003 | 28–23 | 54.9% | #34 | 1,694 | 0 | 1 | 2003 | 25–23 | 52.1% | #56 | 1,608 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2004 | 19–24 | 44.2% | #66 | 1,623 | 0 | 1 | 2004 | 8–18 | 30.8% | #105 | 1,524 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2005 | 7–16 | 30.4% | #122 | 1,503 | 0 | 1 | 2005 | 10–15 | 40.0% | #95 | 1,505 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2006 | 9–7 | 56.2% | #72 | 1,588 | 0 | 1 | 2006 | 7–17 | 29.2% | #115 | 1,470 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2007 | 9–18 | 33.3% | #117 | 1,570 | 0 | 1 | 2007 | 1–10 | 9.1% | #131 | 1,409 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | 2008 | 19–15 | 55.9% | #37 | 1,702 | 0 | 2 | 2008 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #261 | 1,401 | 0 | 0 |
| 32 | 2009 | 10–12 | 45.5% | #101 | 1,653 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 2010 | 14–9 | 60.9% | #62 | 1,734 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 34 | 2011 | 4–10 | 28.6% | #94 | 1,649 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 35 | 2012 | 4–7 | 36.4% | #152 | 1,594 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 38 | 2015 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #855 | 1,577 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |