H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Vania King vs Alicia Molik H2H: 3-1
Vania King holds a 3–1 lead over Alicia Molik in their WTA head-to-head. Across 4 main-draw meetings, Vania King leads 2–1 on hard courts and 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Vania King won the 2007 Birmingham third round 7-6(10) 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.
USA
Age 37
Right-Handed
165 cm / 5'5"
H2H
3
–
1
4 main draw meetings
AUS
Age 45
Right-Handed
182 cm / 6'0"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 14, 2007* | Birmingham | WTA 500 | R32 | Grass | Vania King | 7-6(10) 6-4 | Alicia Molik | Match data |
| Oct 12, 2006* | Bangkok | WTA 500 | R32 | Hard | Vania King | 6-1 7-5 | Alicia Molik | Match data |
| Sep 28, 2006* | Guangzhou | WTA 500 | R32 | Hard | Alicia Molik | 6-7(5) 6-3 7-5 | Vania King | Match data |
| Aug 30, 2006* | US Open | Grand Slam | R128 | Hard | Vania King | 6-3 6-2 | Alicia Molik | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vania King | #824 | #50 | 1,225 | 1,760 | 128 | 160 | 44.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Alicia Molik | #403 | #8 | 2,630 | 2,035 | 151 | 161 | 48.4% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 5 |
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 | Vania King | Alicia Molik | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 2006 | 16–13 | 55.2% | #60 | 1,661 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 2007 | 15–21 | 41.7% | #109 | 1,608 | 0 | 1 | 1999 | 7–12 | 36.8% | #96 | 1,537 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2008 | 7–19 | 26.9% | #128 | 1,512 | 0 | 1 | 2000 | 6–10 | 37.5% | #115 | 1,552 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2009 | 11–12 | 47.8% | #80 | 1,588 | 0 | 1 | 2001 | 14–17 | 45.2% | #47 | 1,613 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2010 | 14–17 | 45.2% | #86 | 1,595 | 0 | 1 | 2002 | 10–19 | 34.5% | #94 | 1,568 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2011 | 13–14 | 48.1% | #76 | 1,689 | 0 | 1 | 2003 | 25–16 | 61.0% | #36 | 1,705 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 2012 | 15–19 | 44.1% | #69 | 1,614 | 0 | 1 | 2004 | 37–18 | 67.3% | #13 | 1,938 | 0 | 4 |
| 24 | 2013 | 8–11 | 42.1% | #85 | 1,630 | 0 | 1 | 2005 | 17–14 | 54.8% | #28 | 1,779 | 0 | 5 |
| 25 | 2014 | 13–15 | 46.4% | #111 | 1,641 | 0 | 1 | 2006 | 6–14 | 30.0% | #165 | 1,632 | 0 | 5 |
| 26 | 2015 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #410 | 1,627 | 0 | 1 | 2007 | 18–22 | 45.0% | #56 | 1,628 | 0 | 5 |
| 27 | 2016 | 13–11 | 54.2% | #78 | 1,643 | 0 | 1 | 2008 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #308 | 1,577 | 0 | 5 |
| 28 | 2017 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #492 | 1,590 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 2018 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #356 | 1,559 | 0 | 1 | 2010 | 8–12 | 40.0% | #129 | 1,561 | 0 | 5 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2011 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #349 | 1,584 | 0 | 5 |