H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Adriana Villagran Reami vs Leigh Anne Thompson H2H: 2-0
Adriana Villagran Reami holds a 2–0 lead over Leigh Anne Thompson in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Adriana Villagran Reami leads 1–0 on clay and 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Adriana Villagran Reami won the 1986 Charleston third round 7-6 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.
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 24, 1986* | Charleston | WTA 500 | R32 | Clay | Adriana Villagran Reami | 7-6 6-1 | Leigh Anne Thompson | Match data |
| Jul 18, 1985* | Newport | WTA 250 | R32 | Grass | Adriana Villagran Reami | 7-5 7-5 | Leigh Anne Thompson | 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 |
| Leigh Anne Thompson | — | — | — | 1,793 | 42 | 73 | 36.5% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 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.
| Adriana Villagran Reami | Leigh Anne Thompson | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1981 | 4–5 | 44.4% | — | 1,542 | 0 | 0 |
| 1973 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,482 | 0 | 0 | 1982 | 20–23 | 46.5% | — | 1,766 | 0 | 1 |
| 1974 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,470 | 0 | 0 | 1983 | 7–17 | 29.2% | — | 1,705 | 0 | 1 |
| 1975 | 1–1 | 50.0% | — | 1,469 | 0 | 0 | 1984 | 0–8 | 0.0% | — | 1,582 | 0 | 1 |
| 1979 | 3–2 | 60.0% | — | 1,513 | 0 | 0 | 1985 | 6–11 | 35.3% | — | 1,590 | 0 | 1 |
| 1980 | 1–3 | 25.0% | — | 1,512 | 0 | 0 | 1986 | 5–9 | 35.7% | — | 1,553 | 0 | 1 |
| 1981 | 0–3 | 0.0% | — | 1,476 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 1982 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,462 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 1984 | 10–11 | 47.6% | — | 1,505 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 1985 | 12–18 | 40.0% | — | 1,556 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 1986 | 13–25 | 34.2% | — | 1,506 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 1987 | 13–21 | 38.2% | — | 1,528 | 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 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |