H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC

Amy Frazier vs Kimiko Date Krumm H2H: 1-3

Kimiko Date Krumm holds a 3–1 lead over Amy Frazier in their WTA head-to-head. Across 4 main-draw meetings, Kimiko Date Krumm leads 3–1 on hard courts. Most recently, Kimiko Date Krumm won the 1996 Tokyo final 7-5 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.

Amy Frazier
USA Age 53 Right-Handed 175 cm / 5'9"
H2H
1 – 3
4 main draw meetings
Kimiko Date Krumm
Age 55 Right-Handed 163 cm / 5'4"

H2H Match Log

DateTournamentCategoryRoundSurfaceWinnerScoreLoserMatch
Apr 21, 1996* Tokyo WTA 500 F Hard Kimiko Date Krumm 7-5 6-4 Amy Frazier #26 Match data
Apr 16, 1995* Tokyo WTA 500 F Hard Amy Frazier #18 7-6 7-5 Kimiko Date Krumm Match data
Apr 10, 1994* Tokyo Japan Open WTA 250 F Hard Kimiko Date Krumm 7-5 6-0 Amy Frazier #26 Match data
Apr 11, 1992* Tokyo Japan Open WTA 250 SF Hard Kimiko Date Krumm 6-3 6-4 Amy Frazier #18 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
Amy Frazier #450 #13 1,381 1,959 416 307 57.5% 0 0 0 3 5 8
Kimiko Date Krumm — — — 2,091 241 188 56.2% 0 1 0 3 4 8

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 Amy Frazier Kimiko Date Krumm
YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles
14 1987 3–4 42.9% #147 1,527 0 0 — — — — — — —
15 1988 12–15 44.4% #58 1,638 0 0 — — — — — — —
16 1989 23–15 60.5% #33 1,725 0 1 — — — — — — —
17 1990 31–14 68.9% #16 1,893 0 2 — — — — — — —
18 1991 25–18 58.1% #28 1,813 0 2 1989 6–5 54.5% — 1,562 0 0
19 1992 33–17 66.0% #19 1,842 0 3 1990 10–7 58.8% — 1,664 0 0
20 1993 10–9 52.6% #39 1,843 0 3 1991 12–11 52.2% — 1,725 0 0
21 1994 28–15 65.1% #16 1,903 0 4 1992 26–13 66.7% — 1,867 0 1
22 1995 26–15 63.4% #18 1,877 0 5 1993 25–11 69.4% — 1,956 0 2
23 1996 20–16 55.6% #33 1,835 0 5 1994 32–12 72.7% — 1,987 0 4
24 1997 17–17 50.0% #37 1,818 0 5 1995 39–12 76.5% — 2,029 0 5
25 1998 12–13 48.0% #42 1,766 0 5 1996 31–13 70.5% — 2,071 0 7
26 1999 31–19 62.0% #19 1,876 0 6 — — — — — — —
27 2000 30–22 57.7% #20 1,852 0 6 — — — — — — —
28 2001 19–19 50.0% #48 1,695 0 6 — — — — — — —
29 2002 19–18 51.4% #39 1,757 0 6 — — — — — — —
30 2003 14–13 51.9% #61 1,746 0 6 — — — — — — —
31 2004 35–17 67.3% #26 1,828 0 7 — — — — — — —
32 2005 18–16 52.9% #52 1,730 0 8 — — — — — — —
33 2006 10–15 40.0% #130 1,626 0 8 — — — — — — —
37 — — — — — — — 2008 0–1 0.0% — 2,042 0 7
38 — — — — — — — 2009 6–11 35.3% — 1,841 0 8
39 — — — — — — — 2010 19–18 51.4% — 1,814 0 8
40 — — — — — — — 2011 7–24 22.6% — 1,567 0 8
41 — — — — — — — 2012 2–14 12.5% — 1,454 0 8
42 — — — — — — — 2013 12–15 44.4% — 1,575 0 8
43 — — — — — — — 2014 11–14 44.0% — 1,597 0 8
44 — — — — — — — 2015 3–6 33.3% — 1,574 0 8
46 — — — — — — — 2017 0–1 0.0% — 1,564 0 8