H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Tatiana Panova vs Erika De Lone H2H: 1-0
Tatiana Panova holds a 1–0 lead over Erika De Lone in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Tatiana Panova leads 1–0 on carpet. Most recently, Tatiana Panova won the 2000 Oklahoma third round 6-1 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.
RUS
Age 49
Right-Handed
154 cm / 5'1"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
USA
Age 53
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 24, 2000* | Oklahoma | WTA 500 | R32 | Carpet | Tatiana Panova | 6-1 6-4 | Erika De Lone | 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 |
| Erika De Lone | #425 | #65 | 501 | 1,603 | 42 | 100 | 29.6% | 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 | Tatiana Panova | Erika De Lone | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1989 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #298 | 1,472 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 1994 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #142 | 1,508 | 0 | 0 | 1990 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #138 | 1,502 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 1995 | 1–6 | 14.3% | #179 | 1,486 | 0 | 0 | 1991 | 9–14 | 39.1% | #110 | 1,558 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1996 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #159 | 1,498 | 0 | 0 | 1992 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #175 | 1,526 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1997 | 3–10 | 23.1% | #97 | 1,475 | 0 | 0 | 1993 | 5–9 | 35.7% | #183 | 1,515 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1998 | 7–18 | 28.0% | #78 | 1,472 | 0 | 0 | 1994 | 1–9 | 10.0% | #200 | 1,436 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1999 | 14–23 | 37.8% | #40 | 1,584 | 0 | 0 | 1995 | 4–9 | 30.8% | #124 | 1,482 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2000 | 23–28 | 45.1% | #34 | 1,698 | 0 | 0 | 1996 | 2–7 | 22.2% | #131 | 1,449 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2001 | 22–30 | 42.3% | #40 | 1,664 | 0 | 0 | 1997 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #149 | 1,442 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2002 | 34–31 | 52.3% | #23 | 1,752 | 0 | 0 | 1998 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #178 | 1,443 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2003 | 7–13 | 35.0% | #114 | 1,636 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 5–7 | 41.7% | #67 | 1,500 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2004 | 8–14 | 36.4% | #77 | 1,595 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 7–18 | 28.0% | #118 | 1,484 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2005 | 8–15 | 34.8% | #91 | 1,519 | 0 | 0 | 2001 | 0–5 | 0.0% | #180 | 1,428 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2006 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #376 | 1,470 | 0 | 0 | 2002 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #165 | 1,422 | 0 | 0 |