H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Tathiana Garbin vs Rita Grande H2H: 1-2
Rita Grande holds a 2–1 lead over Tathiana Garbin in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Rita Grande leads 2–0 on hard courts, while Tathiana Garbin leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Tathiana Garbin won the 2003 Bol third round 6-2 4-6 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.
ITA
Age 49
Right-Handed
172 cm / 5'8"
H2H
1
–
2
3 main draw meetings
ITA
Age 51
Right-Handed
177 cm / 5'10"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 1, 2003* | Bol | WTA 250 | R32 | Clay | Tathiana Garbin | 6-2 4-6 6-2 | Rita Grande | Match data |
| Oct 17, 2002* | Bratislava | WTA 250 | R32 | Hard | Rita Grande | 6-2 6-1 | Tathiana Garbin | Match data |
| Jan 20, 1999* | Australian Open | Grand Slam | R128 | Hard | Rita Grande | 6-7(3) 6-0 9-7 | 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 |
| Rita Grande | #1,172 | #24 | 1,020 | 1,755 | 172 | 218 | 44.1% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
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 | Rita Grande | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1991 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #370 | 1,471 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1993 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #186 | 1,456 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1994 | 7–12 | 36.8% | #146 | 1,491 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1995 | 10–11 | 47.6% | #72 | 1,591 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1998 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #121 | 1,476 | 0 | 0 | 1996 | 10–15 | 40.0% | #71 | 1,627 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1999 | 5–9 | 35.7% | #126 | 1,468 | 0 | 0 | 1997 | 15–18 | 45.5% | #44 | 1,676 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2000 | 23–19 | 54.8% | #42 | 1,629 | 0 | 1 | 1998 | 12–23 | 34.3% | #59 | 1,584 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2001 | 13–19 | 40.6% | #91 | 1,577 | 0 | 1 | 1999 | 21–18 | 53.8% | #54 | 1,679 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2002 | 18–17 | 51.4% | #71 | 1,600 | 0 | 1 | 2000 | 15–21 | 41.7% | #77 | 1,602 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2003 | 12–17 | 41.4% | #82 | 1,557 | 0 | 1 | 2001 | 35–26 | 57.4% | #24 | 1,742 | 0 | 2 |
| 27 | 2004 | 11–18 | 37.9% | #58 | 1,535 | 0 | 1 | 2002 | 21–27 | 43.8% | #46 | 1,641 | 0 | 2 |
| 28 | 2005 | 13–19 | 40.6% | #85 | 1,557 | 0 | 1 | 2003 | 14–25 | 35.9% | #70 | 1,534 | 0 | 3 |
| 29 | 2006 | 15–15 | 50.0% | #38 | 1,628 | 0 | 1 | 2004 | 12–18 | 40.0% | #104 | 1,536 | 0 | 3 |
| 30 | 2007 | 20–16 | 55.6% | #36 | 1,647 | 0 | 1 | 2005 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #1088 | 1,518 | 0 | 3 |
| 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 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |