H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Timea Bacsinszky vs Emilie Loit H2H: 1-1
Timea Bacsinszky and Emilie Loit are tied 1–1 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on clay. Most recently, Timea Bacsinszky won the 2009 Roland Garros first round 4-6 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.
SUI
Age 37
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
FRA
Age 47
Left-Handed
167 cm / 5'6"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 26, 2009* | Roland Garros | Grand Slam | R128 | Clay | Timea Bacsinszky | 4-6 6-4 6-1 | Emilie Loit | Match data |
| Jun 14, 2007* | Barcelona | WTA 250 | R32 | Clay | Emilie Loit | 7-5 6-3 | Timea Bacsinszky | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Timea Bacsinszky | #941 | #9 | 3,157 | 1,933 | 161 | 137 | 54.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 4 |
| Emilie Loit | #161 | #27 | 1,016 | 1,780 | 162 | 180 | 47.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 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 | Timea Bacsinszky | Emilie Loit | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 15 | 2004 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #252 | 1,484 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 2006 | 3–3 | 50.0% | #124 | 1,541 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 2007 | 2–6 | 25.0% | #122 | 1,522 | 0 | 0 | 1997 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #243 | 1,498 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2008 | 13–15 | 46.4% | #54 | 1,592 | 0 | 0 | 1998 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #96 | 1,511 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2009 | 17–10 | 63.0% | #53 | 1,739 | 0 | 1 | 1999 | 3–15 | 16.7% | #101 | 1,424 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2010 | 19–21 | 47.5% | #50 | 1,693 | 0 | 1 | 2000 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #101 | 1,456 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2011 | 3–6 | 33.3% | #247 | 1,662 | 0 | 1 | 2001 | 12–15 | 44.4% | #95 | 1,548 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2012 | 2–6 | 25.0% | #179 | 1,602 | 0 | 1 | 2002 | 19–17 | 52.8% | #58 | 1,625 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2013 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #237 | 1,596 | 0 | 1 | 2003 | 23–24 | 48.9% | #41 | 1,673 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2014 | 11–10 | 52.4% | #48 | 1,678 | 0 | 1 | 2004 | 29–20 | 59.2% | #45 | 1,651 | 0 | 2 |
| 26 | 2015 | 37–14 | 72.5% | #12 | 1,842 | 0 | 3 | 2005 | 15–20 | 42.9% | #82 | 1,546 | 0 | 2 |
| 27 | 2016 | 32–17 | 65.3% | #15 | 1,777 | 0 | 4 | 2006 | 20–16 | 55.6% | #56 | 1,621 | 0 | 2 |
| 28 | 2017 | 15–9 | 62.5% | #39 | 1,816 | 0 | 4 | 2007 | 26–22 | 54.2% | #43 | 1,609 | 0 | 3 |
| 29 | 2018 | 3–8 | 27.3% | #191 | 1,725 | 0 | 4 | 2008 | 5–15 | 25.0% | #137 | 1,513 | 0 | 3 |
| 30 | 2019 | 4–9 | 30.8% | #139 | 1,630 | 0 | 4 | 2009 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #161 | 1,531 | 0 | 3 |