H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Timea Bacsinszky vs Marina Erakovic H2H: 2-0
Timea Bacsinszky holds a 2–0 lead over Marina Erakovic in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Timea Bacsinszky leads 1–0 on clay and 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Timea Bacsinszky won the 2016 Rabat final 6-2 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
2
–
0
2 main draw meetings
NZL
Age 38
Right-Handed
174 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 30, 2016* | Rabat | WTA 250 | F | Clay | Timea Bacsinszky | 6-2 6-1 | Marina Erakovic | Match data |
| Mar 11, 2015* | Indian Wells | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard | Timea Bacsinszky | 4-6 6-3 6-2 | Marina Erakovic | 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 |
| Marina Erakovic | #827 | #39 | 1,392 | 1,701 | 105 | 131 | 44.5% | 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 | Timea Bacsinszky | Marina Erakovic | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 2005 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #213 | 1,498 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2007 | 2–6 | 25.0% | #122 | 1,522 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 2008 | 13–15 | 46.4% | #54 | 1,592 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #153 | 1,457 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2009 | 17–10 | 63.0% | #53 | 1,739 | 0 | 1 | 2008 | 16–16 | 50.0% | #66 | 1,531 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2010 | 19–21 | 47.5% | #50 | 1,693 | 0 | 1 | 2009 | 4–7 | 36.4% | #227 | 1,522 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2011 | 3–6 | 33.3% | #247 | 1,662 | 0 | 1 | 2010 | 2–7 | 22.2% | #333 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2012 | 2–6 | 25.0% | #179 | 1,602 | 0 | 1 | 2011 | 11–8 | 57.9% | #61 | 1,630 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2013 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #237 | 1,596 | 0 | 1 | 2012 | 19–20 | 48.7% | #66 | 1,600 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2014 | 11–10 | 52.4% | #48 | 1,678 | 0 | 1 | 2013 | 20–16 | 55.6% | #46 | 1,673 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2015 | 37–14 | 72.5% | #12 | 1,842 | 0 | 3 | 2014 | 12–20 | 37.5% | #76 | 1,609 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2016 | 32–17 | 65.3% | #15 | 1,777 | 0 | 4 | 2015 | 7–14 | 33.3% | #135 | 1,543 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2017 | 15–9 | 62.5% | #39 | 1,816 | 0 | 4 | 2016 | 11–8 | 57.9% | #106 | 1,625 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 2018 | 3–8 | 27.3% | #191 | 1,725 | 0 | 4 | 2017 | 1–9 | 10.0% | #197 | 1,551 | 0 | 1 |
| 30 | 2019 | 4–9 | 30.8% | #139 | 1,630 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |