H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Tatiana Panova vs Rita Grande H2H: 1-2
Rita Grande holds a 2–1 lead over Tatiana Panova in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on hard courts, while Rita Grande leads 1–0 on carpet. Most recently, Tatiana Panova won the 2004 Memphis third round 6-7(2) 6-4 6-1.
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
–
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 19, 2004* | Memphis | WTA 250 | R32 | Hard | Tatiana Panova | 6-7(2) 6-4 6-1 | Rita Grande | Match data |
| Aug 8, 2001* | Los Angeles | WTA 500 | R64 | Hard | Rita Grande | 6-1 5-7 6-1 | Tatiana Panova | Match data |
| Feb 26, 2000* | Oklahoma | WTA 500 | QF | Carpet | Rita Grande | 4-6 6-3 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 |
| 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 | Tatiana Panova | 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 |
| 17 | 1994 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #142 | 1,508 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 1995 | 1–6 | 14.3% | #179 | 1,486 | 0 | 0 | 1993 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #186 | 1,456 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1996 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #159 | 1,498 | 0 | 0 | 1994 | 7–12 | 36.8% | #146 | 1,491 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1997 | 3–10 | 23.1% | #97 | 1,475 | 0 | 0 | 1995 | 10–11 | 47.6% | #72 | 1,591 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1998 | 7–18 | 28.0% | #78 | 1,472 | 0 | 0 | 1996 | 10–15 | 40.0% | #71 | 1,627 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1999 | 14–23 | 37.8% | #40 | 1,584 | 0 | 0 | 1997 | 15–18 | 45.5% | #44 | 1,676 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2000 | 23–28 | 45.1% | #34 | 1,698 | 0 | 0 | 1998 | 12–23 | 34.3% | #59 | 1,584 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2001 | 22–30 | 42.3% | #40 | 1,664 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 21–18 | 53.8% | #54 | 1,679 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2002 | 34–31 | 52.3% | #23 | 1,752 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 15–21 | 41.7% | #77 | 1,602 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2003 | 7–13 | 35.0% | #114 | 1,636 | 0 | 0 | 2001 | 35–26 | 57.4% | #24 | 1,742 | 0 | 2 |
| 27 | 2004 | 8–14 | 36.4% | #77 | 1,595 | 0 | 0 | 2002 | 21–27 | 43.8% | #46 | 1,641 | 0 | 2 |
| 28 | 2005 | 8–15 | 34.8% | #91 | 1,519 | 0 | 0 | 2003 | 14–25 | 35.9% | #70 | 1,534 | 0 | 3 |
| 29 | 2006 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #376 | 1,470 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 12–18 | 40.0% | #104 | 1,536 | 0 | 3 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2005 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #1088 | 1,518 | 0 | 3 |