H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Tathiana Garbin vs Anke Huber H2H: 0-2
Anke Huber holds a 2–0 lead over Tathiana Garbin in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Anke Huber leads 2–0 on clay. Most recently, Anke Huber won the 2000 Sopot fourth round 6-3 6-3.
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 49
Right-Handed
172 cm / 5'8"
H2H
0
–
2
2 main draw meetings
GER
Age 51
Right-Handed
173 cm / 5'8"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 21, 2000* | Sopot | WTA 500 | R16 | Clay | Anke Huber | 6-3 6-3 | Tathiana Garbin | Match data |
| Apr 15, 2000* | Estoril | WTA 250 | SF | Clay | Anke Huber | 6-3 6-2 | Tathiana Garbin | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tathiana Garbin | #86 | #22 | 1,255 | 1,710 | 167 | 207 | 44.7% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Anke Huber | #18 | #4 | 2,721 | 2,130 | 393 | 203 | 65.9% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 10 | 12 |
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 | Tathiana Garbin | Anke Huber | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 14 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1989 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #199 | 1,517 | 0 | 0 |
| 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1990 | 14–9 | 60.9% | #37 | 1,708 | 0 | 1 |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1991 | 30–13 | 69.8% | #14 | 1,959 | 0 | 2 |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1992 | 28–15 | 65.1% | #11 | 1,964 | 0 | 2 |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1993 | 41–15 | 73.2% | #10 | 2,056 | 0 | 3 |
| 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1994 | 38–16 | 70.4% | #12 | 2,027 | 0 | 6 |
| 20 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1995 | 41–15 | 73.2% | #10 | 2,091 | 0 | 7 |
| 21 | 1998 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #121 | 1,476 | 0 | 0 | 1996 | 45–15 | 75.0% | #7 | 2,055 | 0 | 10 |
| 22 | 1999 | 5–9 | 35.7% | #126 | 1,468 | 0 | 0 | 1997 | 34–24 | 58.6% | #13 | 1,954 | 0 | 10 |
| 23 | 2000 | 23–19 | 54.8% | #42 | 1,629 | 0 | 1 | 1998 | 25–18 | 58.1% | #21 | 1,898 | 0 | 10 |
| 24 | 2001 | 13–19 | 40.6% | #91 | 1,577 | 0 | 1 | 1999 | 32–26 | 55.2% | #16 | 1,886 | 0 | 10 |
| 25 | 2002 | 18–17 | 51.4% | #71 | 1,600 | 0 | 1 | 2000 | 29–16 | 64.4% | #19 | 1,898 | 0 | 12 |
| 26 | 2003 | 12–17 | 41.4% | #82 | 1,557 | 0 | 1 | 2001 | 35–20 | 63.6% | #18 | 1,834 | 0 | 12 |
| 27 | 2004 | 11–18 | 37.9% | #58 | 1,535 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 2005 | 13–19 | 40.6% | #85 | 1,557 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 2006 | 15–15 | 50.0% | #38 | 1,628 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 2007 | 20–16 | 55.6% | #36 | 1,647 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 2008 | 14–20 | 41.2% | #55 | 1,564 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 2009 | 13–16 | 44.8% | #59 | 1,597 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 2010 | 9–17 | 34.6% | #87 | 1,575 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 34 | 2011 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #86 | 1,569 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |