H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Tatiana Panova vs Cara Black H2H: 0-2
Cara Black holds a 2–0 lead over Tatiana Panova in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Cara Black leads 1–0 on grass and 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Cara Black won the 2003 Scottsdale third round 6-0 7-6(7).
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
RUS
Age 49
Right-Handed
154 cm / 5'1"
H2H
0
–
2
2 main draw meetings
ZIM
Age 47
Right-Handed
167 cm / 5'6"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 27, 2003* | Scottsdale | WTA 500 | R32 | Hard | Cara Black | 6-0 7-6(7) | Tatiana Panova | Match data |
| Jun 14, 2000* | Birmingham | WTA 500 | R64 | Grass | Cara Black | 6-1 6-4 | Tatiana Panova | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tatiana Panova | #1,113 | #20 | 1,270 | 1,782 | 130 | 196 | 39.9% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Cara Black | #679 | #31 | 869 | 1,770 | 114 | 149 | 43.3% | 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 | Tatiana Panova | Cara Black | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 1994 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #142 | 1,508 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 1995 | 1–6 | 14.3% | #179 | 1,486 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 1996 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #159 | 1,498 | 0 | 0 | 1998 | 10–10 | 50.0% | #44 | 1,614 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1997 | 3–10 | 23.1% | #97 | 1,475 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 17–22 | 43.6% | #50 | 1,628 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1998 | 7–18 | 28.0% | #78 | 1,472 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 22–20 | 52.4% | #41 | 1,742 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1999 | 14–23 | 37.8% | #40 | 1,584 | 0 | 0 | 2001 | 19–25 | 43.2% | #58 | 1,635 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2000 | 23–28 | 45.1% | #34 | 1,698 | 0 | 0 | 2002 | 20–21 | 48.8% | #56 | 1,620 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 2001 | 22–30 | 42.3% | #40 | 1,664 | 0 | 0 | 2003 | 18–25 | 41.9% | #51 | 1,601 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 2002 | 34–31 | 52.3% | #23 | 1,752 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 5–20 | 20.0% | #138 | 1,457 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2003 | 7–13 | 35.0% | #114 | 1,636 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #179 | 1,491 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2004 | 8–14 | 36.4% | #77 | 1,595 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #288 | 1,496 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2005 | 8–15 | 34.8% | #91 | 1,519 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 2006 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #376 | 1,470 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #660 | 1,480 | 0 | 1 |