H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Vania King vs Lourdes Domínguez Lino H2H: 1-1
Vania King and Lourdes Domínguez Lino are tied 1–1 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Lourdes Domínguez Lino leads 1–0 on clay, while Vania King leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Vania King won the 2016 Miami first round 6-4 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
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
ESP
Age 45
Right-Handed
163 cm / 5'4"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 22, 2016* | Miami | WTA 1000 | R128 | Hard | Vania King | 6-4 6-4 | Lourdes Domínguez Lino | Match data |
| Apr 11, 2007* | Charleston | WTA 1000 | R64 | Clay | Lourdes Domínguez Lino | 6-1 6-4 | Vania King | 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 |
| Lourdes Domínguez Lino | #1,129 | #40 | 1,305 | 1,674 | 125 | 157 | 44.3% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
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 | Lourdes Domínguez Lino | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 2008 | 7–19 | 26.9% | #128 | 1,512 | 0 | 1 | 2000 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #141 | 1,489 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2009 | 11–12 | 47.8% | #80 | 1,588 | 0 | 1 | 2001 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #378 | 1,479 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2010 | 14–17 | 45.2% | #86 | 1,595 | 0 | 1 | 2002 | 4–3 | 57.1% | #390 | 1,518 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2011 | 13–14 | 48.1% | #76 | 1,689 | 0 | 1 | 2003 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #319 | 1,503 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2012 | 15–19 | 44.1% | #69 | 1,614 | 0 | 1 | 2004 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #208 | 1,508 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2013 | 8–11 | 42.1% | #85 | 1,630 | 0 | 1 | 2005 | 6–4 | 60.0% | #72 | 1,553 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2014 | 13–15 | 46.4% | #111 | 1,641 | 0 | 1 | 2006 | 21–19 | 52.5% | #52 | 1,622 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2015 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #410 | 1,627 | 0 | 1 | 2007 | 16–21 | 43.2% | #71 | 1,558 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2016 | 13–11 | 54.2% | #78 | 1,643 | 0 | 1 | 2008 | 6–11 | 35.3% | #91 | 1,521 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2017 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #492 | 1,590 | 0 | 1 | 2009 | 6–13 | 31.6% | #134 | 1,484 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 2018 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #356 | 1,559 | 0 | 1 | 2010 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #85 | 1,493 | 0 | 1 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2011 | 16–16 | 50.0% | #79 | 1,583 | 0 | 2 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2012 | 16–16 | 50.0% | #48 | 1,653 | 0 | 2 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2013 | 17–22 | 43.6% | #69 | 1,620 | 0 | 2 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2014 | 7–11 | 38.9% | #110 | 1,570 | 0 | 2 |
| 34 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2015 | 4–5 | 44.4% | #100 | 1,552 | 0 | 2 |
| 35 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2016 | 3–8 | 27.3% | #220 | 1,517 | 0 | 2 |