H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 16:32 UTC
Vera Zvonareva vs Emilie Loit H2H: 1-0
Vera Zvonareva holds a 1–0 lead over Emilie Loit in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Vera Zvonareva leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Vera Zvonareva won the 2002 Warsaw fourth round 6-3 6-2.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
RUS
Age 41
Right-Handed
172 cm / 5'8"
H2H
1
–
0
1 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 10, 2002* | Warsaw | WTA 250 | R16 | Clay | Vera Zvonareva | 6-3 6-2 | Emilie Loit | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vera Zvonareva | #307 | #2 | 7,935 | 2,077 | 459 | 268 | 63.1% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 5 | 6 | 12 |
| 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 | Vera Zvonareva | Emilie Loit | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 15 | 2000 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #349 | 1,512 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 2002 | 19–11 | 63.3% | #45 | 1,680 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 2003 | 45–22 | 67.2% | #13 | 1,849 | 0 | 1 | 1997 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #243 | 1,498 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2004 | 54–27 | 66.7% | #11 | 1,935 | 0 | 2 | 1998 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #96 | 1,511 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2005 | 21–21 | 50.0% | #42 | 1,683 | 0 | 3 | 1999 | 3–15 | 16.7% | #101 | 1,424 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2006 | 37–22 | 62.7% | #24 | 1,884 | 0 | 5 | 2000 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #101 | 1,456 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2007 | 30–14 | 68.2% | #22 | 1,935 | 0 | 5 | 2001 | 12–15 | 44.4% | #95 | 1,548 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2008 | 58–22 | 72.5% | #7 | 2,005 | 0 | 7 | 2002 | 19–17 | 52.8% | #58 | 1,625 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2009 | 34–14 | 70.8% | #9 | 1,916 | 0 | 9 | 2003 | 23–24 | 48.9% | #41 | 1,673 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2010 | 49–18 | 73.1% | #2 | 2,051 | 0 | 10 | 2004 | 29–20 | 59.2% | #45 | 1,651 | 0 | 2 |
| 26 | 2011 | 54–22 | 71.1% | #7 | 1,946 | 0 | 12 | 2005 | 15–20 | 42.9% | #82 | 1,546 | 0 | 2 |
| 27 | 2012 | 9–9 | 50.0% | #95 | 1,808 | 0 | 12 | 2006 | 20–16 | 55.6% | #56 | 1,621 | 0 | 2 |
| 28 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2007 | 26–22 | 54.2% | #43 | 1,609 | 0 | 3 |
| 29 | 2014 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #251 | 1,743 | 0 | 12 | 2008 | 5–15 | 25.0% | #137 | 1,513 | 0 | 3 |
| 30 | 2015 | 7–8 | 46.7% | #185 | 1,671 | 0 | 12 | 2009 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #161 | 1,531 | 0 | 3 |
| 32 | 2017 | 3–1 | 75.0% | #200 | 1,676 | 0 | 12 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 2018 | 6–9 | 40.0% | #109 | 1,702 | 0 | 12 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 34 | 2019 | 6–7 | 46.2% | #159 | 1,680 | 0 | 12 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 35 | 2020 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #164 | 1,731 | 0 | 12 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 36 | 2021 | 11–11 | 50.0% | #81 | 1,753 | 0 | 12 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 37 | 2022 | 3–8 | 27.3% | #357 | 1,711 | 0 | 12 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 38 | 2023 | 4–8 | 33.3% | #272 | 1,683 | 0 | 12 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 41 | 2026 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #307 | 1,646 | 0 | 12 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |