H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Adriana Villagran Reami vs Emiko Okagawa H2H: 2-1
Adriana Villagran Reami holds a 2–1 lead over Emiko Okagawa in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on hard courts, while Adriana Villagran Reami leads 1–0 on carpet. Most recently, Emiko Okagawa won the 1986 Tokyo Japan Open third round 6-2 6-3.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 16, 1986* | Tokyo Japan Open | WTA 250 | R32 | Hard | Emiko Okagawa | 6-2 6-3 | Adriana Villagran Reami | Match data |
| Oct 10, 1986* | Taipei | WTA 250 | R16 | Carpet | Adriana Villagran Reami | 6-2 6-4 | Emiko Okagawa | Match data |
| Oct 5, 1984* | Tokyo Borden | WTA 250 | R16 | Hard | Adriana Villagran Reami | 6-4 4-6 6-3 | Emiko Okagawa | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Adriana Villagran Reami | — | — | — | 1,597 | 66 | 119 | 35.7% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Emiko Okagawa | — | — | — | 1,523 | 18 | 39 | 31.6% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
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.
| Adriana Villagran Reami | Emiko Okagawa | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles |
| 1972 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,498 | 0 | 0 | 1980 | 1–2 | 33.3% | — | 1,483 | 0 | 0 |
| 1973 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,482 | 0 | 0 | 1981 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,476 | 0 | 0 |
| 1974 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,470 | 0 | 0 | 1982 | 1–2 | 33.3% | — | 1,481 | 0 | 0 |
| 1975 | 1–1 | 50.0% | — | 1,469 | 0 | 0 | 1983 | 0–2 | 0.0% | — | 1,454 | 0 | 0 |
| 1979 | 3–2 | 60.0% | — | 1,513 | 0 | 0 | 1984 | 5–6 | 45.5% | — | 1,473 | 0 | 0 |
| 1980 | 1–3 | 25.0% | — | 1,512 | 0 | 0 | 1985 | 1–8 | 11.1% | — | 1,436 | 0 | 0 |
| 1981 | 0–3 | 0.0% | — | 1,476 | 0 | 0 | 1986 | 3–5 | 37.5% | — | 1,457 | 0 | 0 |
| 1982 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,462 | 0 | 0 | 1987 | 4–6 | 40.0% | — | 1,486 | 0 | 0 |
| 1984 | 10–11 | 47.6% | — | 1,505 | 0 | 0 | 1988 | 3–4 | 42.9% | — | 1,488 | 0 | 0 |
| 1985 | 12–18 | 40.0% | — | 1,556 | 0 | 0 | 1990 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,474 | 0 | 0 |
| 1986 | 13–25 | 34.2% | — | 1,506 | 0 | 0 | 1991 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,458 | 0 | 0 |
| 1987 | 13–21 | 38.2% | — | 1,528 | 0 | 0 | 1992 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,447 | 0 | 0 |
| 1988 | 11–18 | 37.9% | — | 1,522 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 1989 | 2–12 | 14.3% | — | 1,446 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 1990 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,432 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |