H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Tsvetana Pironkova vs Vania King H2H: 0-1
Vania King holds a 1–0 lead over Tsvetana Pironkova in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Vania King leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Vania King won the 2012 Rome second round 6-0 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.
BUL
Age 38
Right-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
USA
Age 37
Right-Handed
165 cm / 5'5"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 11, 2017 | Doha | WTA 1000 | Q1 | Hard | Tsvetana Pironkova | 6-3 6-3 | Vania King | Match data |
| May 16, 2012* | Rome | WTA 1000 | R64 | Clay | Vania King | 6-0 6-1 | Tsvetana Pironkova | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tsvetana Pironkova | #1,170 | #31 | 1,805 | 1,770 | 169 | 222 | 43.2% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Vania King | #824 | #50 | 1,225 | 1,760 | 128 | 160 | 44.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 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 | Tsvetana Pironkova | Vania King | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2005 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #164 | 1,520 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 2005 | 6–3 | 66.7% | #86 | 1,599 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 16–13 | 55.2% | #60 | 1,661 | 0 | 1 |
| 18 | 2006 | 15–16 | 48.4% | #64 | 1,662 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 15–21 | 41.7% | #109 | 1,608 | 0 | 1 |
| 19 | 2007 | 7–15 | 31.8% | #95 | 1,596 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 7–19 | 26.9% | #128 | 1,512 | 0 | 1 |
| 20 | 2008 | 15–17 | 46.9% | #44 | 1,631 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 11–12 | 47.8% | #80 | 1,588 | 0 | 1 |
| 21 | 2009 | 9–20 | 31.0% | #97 | 1,546 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 14–17 | 45.2% | #86 | 1,595 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 2010 | 16–15 | 51.6% | #35 | 1,623 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 13–14 | 48.1% | #76 | 1,689 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 2011 | 13–22 | 37.1% | #46 | 1,644 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 15–19 | 44.1% | #69 | 1,614 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 2012 | 19–23 | 45.2% | #42 | 1,658 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 8–11 | 42.1% | #85 | 1,630 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 2013 | 9–21 | 30.0% | #108 | 1,561 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 13–15 | 46.4% | #111 | 1,641 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2014 | 17–19 | 47.2% | #38 | 1,619 | 0 | 1 | 2015 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #410 | 1,627 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2015 | 18–21 | 46.2% | #59 | 1,633 | 0 | 1 | 2016 | 13–11 | 54.2% | #78 | 1,643 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2016 | 10–12 | 45.5% | #64 | 1,671 | 0 | 1 | 2017 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #492 | 1,590 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 2017 | 6–10 | 37.5% | #165 | 1,639 | 0 | 1 | 2018 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #356 | 1,559 | 0 | 1 |
| 32 | 2020 | 6–2 | 75.0% | #136 | 1,739 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 2021 | 3–6 | 33.3% | #252 | 1,706 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |