H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Tathiana Garbin vs Vania King H2H: 1-2
Vania King holds a 2–1 lead over Tathiana Garbin in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Vania King leads 2–1 on hard courts. Most recently, Vania King won the 2008 Cincinnati third round 4-6 6-3 7-5.
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
USA
Age 37
Right-Handed
165 cm / 5'5"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 14, 2008* | Cincinnati | WTA 500 | R32 | Hard | Vania King | 4-6 6-3 7-5 | Tathiana Garbin | Match data |
| Mar 12, 2008* | Indian Wells | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard | Tathiana Garbin | 6-3 6-3 | Vania King | Match data |
| Aug 23, 2007* | New Haven | WTA 500 | R32 | Hard | Vania King | 6-4 6-4 | 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 |
| Vania King | #824 | #50 | 1,225 | 1,760 | 128 | 160 | 44.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 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 | Tathiana Garbin | Vania King | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2005 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #164 | 1,520 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2006 | 16–13 | 55.2% | #60 | 1,661 | 0 | 1 |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2007 | 15–21 | 41.7% | #109 | 1,608 | 0 | 1 |
| 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2008 | 7–19 | 26.9% | #128 | 1,512 | 0 | 1 |
| 20 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2009 | 11–12 | 47.8% | #80 | 1,588 | 0 | 1 |
| 21 | 1998 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #121 | 1,476 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 14–17 | 45.2% | #86 | 1,595 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 1999 | 5–9 | 35.7% | #126 | 1,468 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 13–14 | 48.1% | #76 | 1,689 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 2000 | 23–19 | 54.8% | #42 | 1,629 | 0 | 1 | 2012 | 15–19 | 44.1% | #69 | 1,614 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 2001 | 13–19 | 40.6% | #91 | 1,577 | 0 | 1 | 2013 | 8–11 | 42.1% | #85 | 1,630 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 2002 | 18–17 | 51.4% | #71 | 1,600 | 0 | 1 | 2014 | 13–15 | 46.4% | #111 | 1,641 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2003 | 12–17 | 41.4% | #82 | 1,557 | 0 | 1 | 2015 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #410 | 1,627 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2004 | 11–18 | 37.9% | #58 | 1,535 | 0 | 1 | 2016 | 13–11 | 54.2% | #78 | 1,643 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2005 | 13–19 | 40.6% | #85 | 1,557 | 0 | 1 | 2017 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #492 | 1,590 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 2006 | 15–15 | 50.0% | #38 | 1,628 | 0 | 1 | 2018 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #356 | 1,559 | 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 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |