H2H data updated: 2026-09-14 00:00 UTC

Amélie Mauresmo vs Tamarine Tanasugarn H2H: 4-2

Amélie Mauresmo holds a 4–2 lead over Tamarine Tanasugarn in their WTA head-to-head. Across 6 main-draw meetings, Amélie Mauresmo leads 4–1 on hard courts, while Tamarine Tanasugarn leads 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Tamarine Tanasugarn won the 2008 Qatar Open round of 32 7-6(7) 7-5.

Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.

Amélie Mauresmo
FRA Age 47 Right-Handed 175 cm / 5'9"
H2H
4 – 2
6 main-draw meetings
Tamarine Tanasugarn
THA Age 49 Right-Handed 165 cm / 5'5"

H2H Match Log

PlayerScorePlayerMatch DataDateRoundTournamentCategorySurface
Tamarine Tanasugarn #101 7-6(7) 7-5 Amélie Mauresmo #22 Match data Feb 21, 2008* R32 Qatar Open Tier I → modern equivalent WTA 1000 Hard
Amélie Mauresmo #3 6-4 1-6 6-2 Tamarine Tanasugarn #50 Match data Aug 5, 2004* R32 Canadian Open Tier I → modern equivalent WTA 1000 Hard
Amélie Mauresmo #6 6-2 6-2 Tamarine Tanasugarn #39 Match data Sep 2, 2003* R16 US Open Grand Slam Hard
Amélie Mauresmo #8 6-3 5-7 6-2 Tamarine Tanasugarn #32 Match data Mar 5, 2003 R32 Indian Wells Open Tier I → modern equivalent WTA 1000 Hard
Amélie Mauresmo #9 7-6(3) 6-1 Tamarine Tanasugarn #25 Match data Jan 20, 2002* R32 Australian Open Grand Slam Hard
Tamarine Tanasugarn #31 6-4 6-4 Amélie Mauresmo #6 Match data Jul 1, 2001* R32 Wimbledon Grand Slam Grass

Estimated match date where the exact historical date is unavailable. Arrows show an edition's recorded category and documented modern equivalent; unresolved editions keep their recorded category. Asterisked totals include editions mapped from documented historical predecessor categories. Mapping details.

Career Comparison

Player Current Peak Pts Elo W L Win % GS 1000 including documented historical predecessor categories Finals 500 including documented historical predecessor categories 250 including documented historical predecessor categories Titles
Amélie Mauresmo #21 #1 4,992 2,225 463 185 71.5% 2 6 1 15 1 25
Tamarine Tanasugarn #947 #19 1,508 1,825 268 276 49.3% 0 0 0 0 4 4

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 Amélie Mauresmo Tamarine Tanasugarn
YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles
15 1995 0–1 0.0% #250 1,488 0 0 — — — — — — —
16 1996 2–2 50.0% #180 1,522 0 0 1993 0–1 0.0% #407 1,483 0 0
17 1997 4–6 40.0% #100 1,556 0 0 1994 1–1 50.0% #227 1,493 0 0
18 1998 20–18 52.6% #29 1,728 0 0 1995 2–5 28.6% #213 1,479 0 0
19 1999 32–14 69.6% #10 1,911 0 1 1996 9–5 64.3% #75 1,610 0 0
20 2000 26–13 66.7% #16 1,906 0 2 1997 18–20 47.4% #47 1,647 0 0
21 2001 43–12 78.2% #9 2,022 0 6 1998 20–21 48.8% #37 1,701 0 0
22 2002 45–15 75.0% #6 2,061 0 8 1999 8–13 38.1% #71 1,633 0 0
23 2003 45–17 72.6% #4 2,065 0 10 2000 31–19 62.0% #28 1,792 0 0
24 2004 61–12 83.6% #2 2,178 0 15 2001 24–21 53.3% #29 1,698 0 0
25 2005 53–16 76.8% #3 2,133 0 19 2002 32–26 55.2% #28 1,676 0 0
26 2006 50–14 78.1% #3 2,165 2 23 2003 28–23 54.9% #34 1,694 0 1
27 2007 27–14 65.9% #18 1,972 2 24 2004 19–25 43.2% #66 1,609 0 1
28 2008 30–19 61.2% #24 1,820 2 24 2005 7–16 30.4% #122 1,496 0 1
29 2009 25–12 67.6% #21 1,873 2 25 2006 9–7 56.2% #72 1,584 0 1
30 — — — — — — — 2007 9–18 33.3% #117 1,568 0 1
31 — — — — — — — 2008 19–16 54.3% #37 1,684 0 2
32 — — — — — — — 2009 10–12 45.5% #101 1,645 0 3
33 — — — — — — — 2010 14–9 60.9% #62 1,732 0 4
34 — — — — — — — 2011 4–10 28.6% #94 1,648 0 4
35 — — — — — — — 2012 4–7 36.4% #152 1,595 0 4
38 — — — — — — — 2015 0–1 0.0% #855 1,577 0 4

Surface Results by Age

Seasons are aligned by the age each player spent most of that calendar year. Results cover completed main-draw matches. Bold green marks the higher win percentage when both players have at least 5 matches on that surface at the aligned age.

Age Amélie Mauresmo Tamarine Tanasugarn
Yr HardClayGrassCarpet Yr HardClayGrassCarpet
W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win %
15 1995 — — — — 0 1 1 0.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
16 1996 — — — — 1 1 2 50.0% 1 1 2 50.0% — — — — 1993 0 1 1 0.0% — — — — — — — — — — — —
17 1997 — — — — 3 3 6 50.0% — — — — 1 3 4 25.0% 1994 1 1 2 50.0% — — — — — — — — — — — —
18 1998 9 7 16 56.3% 8 6 14 57.1% 1 2 3 33.3% 2 3 5 40.0% 1995 2 5 7 28.6% — — — — — — — — — — — —
19 1999 19 7 26 73.1% 7 4 11 63.6% — — — — 6 3 9 66.7% 1996 8 4 12 66.7% — — — — 1 1 2 50.0% — — — —
20 2000 8 5 13 61.5% 13 4 17 76.5% 0 1 1 0.0% 5 3 8 62.5% 1997 12 11 23 52.2% 2 5 7 28.6% 3 3 6 50.0% 1 1 2 50.0%
21 2001 15 7 22 68.2% 16 3 19 84.2% 2 1 3 66.7% 10 1 11 90.9% 1998 15 12 27 55.6% 1 5 6 16.7% 4 3 7 57.1% 0 1 1 0.0%
22 2002 25 5 30 83.3% 7 5 12 58.3% 7 2 9 77.8% 6 3 9 66.7% 1999 3 8 11 27.3% 0 3 3 0.0% 5 2 7 71.4% — — — —
23 2003 23 11 34 67.6% 15 3 18 83.3% 1 1 2 50.0% 6 2 8 75.0% 2000 19 12 31 61.3% 2 2 4 50.0% 9 3 12 75.0% 1 2 3 33.3%
24 2004 35 7 42 83.3% 19 3 22 86.4% 7 2 9 77.8% — — — — 2001 18 15 33 54.5% 0 3 3 0.0% 6 3 9 66.7% — — — —
25 2005 36 10 46 78.3% 9 2 11 81.8% 5 2 7 71.4% 3 2 5 60.0% 2002 24 16 40 60.0% 3 6 9 33.3% 3 3 6 50.0% 2 1 3 66.7%
26 2006 32 10 42 76.2% 6 2 8 75.0% 7 1 8 87.5% 5 1 6 83.3% 2003 21 16 37 56.8% 1 3 4 25.0% 4 3 7 57.1% 2 1 3 66.7%
27 2007 13 7 20 65.0% 6 4 10 60.0% 6 2 8 75.0% 2 1 3 66.7% 2004 13 18 31 41.9% 0 4 4 0.0% 6 2 8 75.0% 0 1 1 0.0%
28 2008 21 14 35 60.0% 4 2 6 66.7% 3 2 5 60.0% 2 1 3 66.7% 2005 3 10 13 23.1% 0 4 4 0.0% 4 2 6 66.7% — — — —
29 2009 12 7 19 63.2% 4 3 7 57.1% 4 2 6 66.7% 5 0 5 100.0% 2006 7 6 13 53.8% — — — — 2 1 3 66.7% — — — —
30 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 2007 7 12 19 36.8% 2 5 7 28.6% 0 1 1 0.0% — — — —
31 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 2008 8 12 20 40.0% 0 2 2 0.0% 11 2 13 84.6% — — — —
32 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 2009 3 7 10 30.0% 1 3 4 25.0% 6 2 8 75.0% — — — —
33 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 2010 12 5 17 70.6% 0 1 1 0.0% 2 3 5 40.0% — — — —
34 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 2011 3 9 12 25.0% — — — — 1 1 2 50.0% — — — —
35 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 2012 4 4 8 50.0% 0 1 1 0.0% 0 2 2 0.0% — — — —
38 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 2015 0 1 1 0.0% — — — — — — — — — — — —
Career — 248 97 345 71.9% 118 46 164 72.0% 44 19 63 69.8% 53 23 76 69.7% — 183 185 368 49.7% 12 47 59 20.3% 67 37 104 64.4% 6 7 13 46.2%

Performance Progression by Age

Seasons are aligned by the age each player spent most of that calendar year. Detailed serve and return statistics available for 222/395 of Amélie Mauresmo's and 141/267 of Tamarine Tanasugarn's main draw matches. Sample is shown as matches with detailed serve and return statistics / total main draw matches. Bold green marks the stronger value when both stat samples contain at least 5 matches; lower is better for DFs/M.

Age Amélie Mauresmo Tamarine Tanasugarn
Yr Sample Aces/M DFs/M 1st Sv% 1st Pts% 2nd Pts% BP Saved% BP Conv% Svc Pts% Ret Pts% Yr Sample Aces/M DFs/M 1st Sv% 1st Pts% 2nd Pts% BP Saved% BP Conv% Svc Pts% Ret Pts%
23 2003 10/62 2.3 2.9 63.3% 73.3% 50.3% 41.3% 41.8% 65.2% 48.3% — —/— — — — — — — — — —
24 2004 18/73 4.5 4.4 58.2% 74.6% 52.0% 54.6% 50.2% 65.2% 51.1% — —/— — — — — — — — — —
25 2005 24/69 3.2 4.3 58.0% 72.7% 50.1% 57.2% 55.5% 63.0% 47.6% — —/— — — — — — — — — —
26 2006 55/64 2.6 2.9 64.8% 68.0% 49.1% 60.4% 53.9% 61.2% 47.1% 2003 6/51 2.0 3.0 58.2% 61.2% 49.7% 35.8% 37.7% 56.3% 42.0%
27 2007 36/41 4.4 4.8 61.2% 69.9% 45.6% 56.1% 53.4% 60.6% 45.7% 2004 4/44 2.0 4.5 59.8% 53.6% 36.4% 48.4% 51.3% 46.9% 39.9%
28 2008 45/49 3.3 6.3 61.4% 67.4% 43.0% 56.0% 51.2% 57.9% 47.5% 2005 9/23 1.8 3.6 58.3% 59.8% 45.3% 40.8% 52.1% 53.8% 48.0%
29 2009 34/37 4.0 5.5 60.2% 67.0% 45.7% 55.9% 48.6% 58.9% 45.1% 2006 3/16 1.7 2.3 62.1% 59.8% 46.6% 49.0% 41.0% 55.0% 41.7%
30 — —/— — — — — — — — — — 2007 21/27 1.4 4.0 59.8% 57.8% 40.3% 47.2% 47.0% 50.7% 40.6%
31 — —/— — — — — — — — — — 2008 30/35 1.1 2.9 62.5% 63.1% 46.1% 61.7% 50.8% 56.7% 42.7%
32 — —/— — — — — — — — — — 2009 20/22 0.8 3.4 65.8% 60.5% 46.3% 57.5% 47.3% 55.3% 42.6%
33 — —/— — — — — — — — — — 2010 22/23 1.0 3.1 68.1% 58.7% 51.5% 55.0% 56.2% 56.1% 48.3%
34 — —/— — — — — — — — — — 2011 14/14 0.7 3.4 63.9% 56.7% 43.6% 34.9% 42.6% 51.9% 40.0%
35 — —/— — — — — — — — — — 2012 11/11 1.0 3.5 64.1% 52.1% 45.1% 43.9% 58.9% 49.2% 41.3%
38 — —/— — — — — — — — — — 2015 1/1 0.0 4.0 67.2% 51.3% 36.8% 50.0% 50.0% 46.6% 30.9%
Career — 222/648 3.5 4.6 61.5% 69.3% 47.2% 56.4% 51.8% 60.8% 47.1% — 141/544 1.1 3.3 63.2% 59.0% 45.5% 50.7% 49.7% 53.9% 43.0%

Advanced Statistics Comparison by Age

Seasons are aligned by the age each player spent most of that calendar year. Metrics use eligible main-draw results; point statistics use matches with detailed data. Bold green marks the stronger value when both underlying samples are sufficient. Lower is better for Schedule because a negative value means a tougher schedule. Career Schedule is normalized per 100 matches.

Age Amélie Mauresmo Tamarine Tanasugarn
Yr Elo P+ Serve+ Return+ PD TPW% Hard Elo Clay Elo Grass Elo Set Win % Set Margin Dec. Set Tiebreak Pressure+ Schedule Yr Elo P+ Serve+ Return+ PD TPW% Hard Elo Clay Elo Grass Elo Set Win % Set Margin Dec. Set Tiebreak Pressure+ Schedule
15 1995 1488 98.9 — — — — — — — 33.3% -1.00 0–1 — — +0.12 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
16 1996 1523 102.5 — — — — — — — 50.0% -0.20 1–1 — — +0.03 1993 1483 96.2 — — — — — — — 0.0% -1.50 — 0–1 — +0.17
17 1997 1556 126.4 — — — — -24 +36 — 48.0% -0.08 1–4 (20%) 1–2 (33%) 97.2 -0.06 1994 1493 103.5 — — — — — — — 50.0% -0.83 1–1 — — +0.06
18 1998 1729 146.0 — — — — -83 0 -114 51.2% +0.12 5–3 (63%) 5–4 (56%) 107.0 -0.59 1995 1479 101.3 — — — — +23 — — 29.4% -1.53 2–1 (67%) 1–2 (33%) 100.8 +0.28
19 1999 1912 159.1 — — — — -27 -138 — 61.2% +0.73 12–5 (71%) 5–5 (50%) 109.0 +1.67 1996 1610 124.2 — — — — +2 — — 64.3% +1.21 0–2 1–3 (25%) — +0.66
20 2000 1907 163.5 — — — — -30 +17 — 64.6% +1.38 5–7 (42%) 4–7 (36%) 93.9 -1.71 1997 1648 125.4 — — — — -4 -102 +9 48.3% -0.34 5–6 (45%) 3–2 (60%) 100.9 +1.65
21 2001 2023 167.1 — — — — -34 +99 -402 70.7% +1.41 14–3 (82%) 10–3 (77%) 113.0 -2.74 1998 1702 138.7 — — — — +13 -199 +25 48.9% -0.10 5–5 (50%) 3–4 (43%) 99.1 +1.91
22 2002 2062 162.6 — — — — +32 -20 -255 74.0% +1.75 6–7 (46%) 10–5 (67%) 98.8 -0.13 1999 1634 113.0 — — — — -11 -165 +110 40.8% -0.57 3–4 (43%) 3–2 (60%) 99.4 +0.52
23 2003 2065 163.0 +5.99 +3.35 1.388 56.1% +3 +92 — 69.4% +1.11 13–5 (72%) 13–2 (87%) 108.6 -2.28 2000 1792 139.5 — — — — -52 -296 +110 59.5% +0.54 7–4 (64%) 6–7 (46%) 102.9 -1.30
24 2004 2178 168.3 +7.28 +5.47 1.468 57.6% +1 +37 -262 78.5% +2.20 14–6 (70%) 8–5 (62%) 104.3 -0.48 2001 1698 135.6 — — — — +14 -272 +291 51.5% +0.09 8–9 (47%) 7–6 (54%) 97.5 +2.28
25 2005 2133 167.1 +5.80 +3.65 1.286 55.4% +23 +95 -185 72.0% +1.48 10–6 (63%) 7–2 (78%) 102.5 -0.83 2002 1677 130.8 — — — — +37 -232 +254 52.5% +0.01 15–10 (60%) 7–6 (54%) 101.9 +2.48
26 2006 2166 170.3 +5.44 +4.78 1.215 54.1% +18 +5 -62 70.5% +1.49 15–4 (79%) 8–3 (73%) 108.7 -3.85 2003 1695 137.1 +0.58 -0.37 0.961 48.9% +45 -272 +201 54.7% +0.32 7–8 (47%) 5–6 (45%) 97.4 +0.78
27 2007 1973 149.7 +4.23 +2.32 1.159 53.0% +81 +133 +141 63.4% +1.04 6–9 (40%) 6–8 (43%) 89.6 -1.04 2004 1610 121.0 -2.76 -1.27 0.751 43.8% -13 -221 +320 45.7% -0.05 2–8 (20%) 3–4 (43%) 92.4 +1.55
28 2008 1820 135.6 +2.15 +2.79 1.128 52.5% +25 +198 +234 56.9% +0.66 14–8 (64%) 8–9 (47%) 94.5 +0.52 2005 1497 98.5 -0.83 +0.77 1.037 50.9% -9 -166 +399 30.6% -1.35 2–1 (67%) 0–2 — +0.91
29 2009 1873 146.4 +3.25 +2.00 1.095 52.0% +15 +92 +120 61.4% +0.83 12–4 (75%) 5–5 (50%) 103.7 -1.60 2006 1585 113.8 -0.78 -1.37 0.927 47.9% -34 — +318 52.8% +0.56 3–3 (50%) 1–3 (25%) 98.4 +0.99
30 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 2007 1569 117.4 -2.84 -1.65 0.822 45.7% 0 -212 — 29.8% -1.54 4–3 (57%) 2–1 (67%) 103.0 -2.05
31 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 2008 1684 130.6 +1.07 -0.63 0.987 49.9% -102 — +348 53.2% -0.05 5–4 (56%) 5–1 (83%) 104.5 -1.05
32 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 2009 1646 112.2 -0.30 -0.53 0.953 49.0% -110 -287 +344 46.9% -0.18 2–3 (40%) 2–1 (67%) 99.3 -0.13
33 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 2010 1732 129.8 +0.24 +3.07 1.101 52.2% -26 — +172 55.8% +0.65 5–1 (83%) 2–2 (50%) 104.9 -0.51
34 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 2011 1648 112.1 -1.46 -2.12 0.832 45.7% -16 — — 28.6% -1.57 — — — -0.69
35 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 2012 1595 100.2 -3.00 -1.41 0.812 45.8% +29 — — 31.8% -1.59 1–1 1–1 — -0.01
38 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 2015 1577 97.4 -0.66 -2.32 0.578 38.9% — — — 0.0% -3.50 — 0–1 — +0.05
Career — 2226 166.5 +4.45 +3.42 1.200 53.8% +5 +46 -86 66.9% +1.23 128–73 (64%) 90–60 (60%) 108.0 -2.04 — 1825 132.1 -0.71 -0.34 0.932 48.5% -6 -214 +226 48.6% -0.13 77–74 (51%) 52–55 (49%) 98.6 +1.57

Career Rivalries

Each player's five most-played main-draw opponents. The current matchup is highlighted when it appears in a player's top five.