H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 08:25 UTC
Andrea Temesvari vs Mary Joe Fernandez H2H: 0-1
Mary Joe Fernandez holds a 1–0 lead over Andrea Temesvari in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Mary Joe Fernandez leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Mary Joe Fernandez won the 1986 Roland Garros second round 5-7 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.
HUN
Age 60
Right-Handed
182 cm / 6'0"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
Age 54
Right-Handed
176 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 29, 1986* | Roland Garros | Grand Slam | R64 | Clay | Mary Joe Fernandez | 5-7 6-2 6-3 | Andrea Temesvari | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Andrea Temesvari | #932 | #7 | 109 | 2,021 | 185 | 178 | 51.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 5 |
| Mary Joe Fernandez | #136 | #4 | 2,114 | 2,191 | 409 | 192 | 68.1% | 0 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 7 |
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 | Andrea Temesvari | Mary Joe Fernandez | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 12 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1984 | 0–2 | 0.0% | — | 1,475 | 0 | 0 |
| 13 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1985 | 5–6 | 45.5% | #99 | 1,554 | 0 | 0 |
| 14 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1986 | 18–14 | 56.2% | #27 | 1,764 | 0 | 0 |
| 15 | 1981 | 11–6 | 64.7% | — | 1,626 | 0 | 1 | 1987 | 24–14 | 63.2% | #20 | 1,895 | 0 | 0 |
| 16 | 1982 | 18–14 | 56.2% | — | 1,772 | 0 | 1 | 1988 | 22–11 | 66.7% | #15 | 1,922 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 1983 | 42–15 | 73.7% | — | 1,988 | 0 | 4 | 1989 | 32–15 | 68.1% | #12 | 1,977 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 1984 | 24–16 | 60.0% | #14 | 1,888 | 0 | 4 | 1990 | 40–10 | 80.0% | #4 | 2,123 | 0 | 2 |
| 19 | 1985 | 18–12 | 60.0% | #16 | 1,847 | 0 | 5 | 1991 | 47–18 | 72.3% | #8 | 2,062 | 0 | 2 |
| 20 | 1986 | 11–12 | 47.8% | #43 | 1,787 | 0 | 5 | 1992 | 47–16 | 74.6% | #6 | 2,108 | 0 | 2 |
| 21 | 1987 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #193 | 1,762 | 0 | 5 | 1993 | 34–13 | 72.3% | #7 | 2,054 | 0 | 3 |
| 22 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1994 | 21–9 | 70.0% | #14 | 1,975 | 0 | 4 |
| 23 | 1989 | 18–15 | 54.5% | #43 | 1,752 | 0 | 5 | 1995 | 29–11 | 72.5% | #8 | 2,038 | 0 | 6 |
| 24 | 1990 | 8–19 | 29.6% | #117 | 1,612 | 0 | 5 | 1996 | 26–15 | 63.4% | #16 | 1,926 | 0 | 6 |
| 25 | 1991 | 6–14 | 30.0% | #159 | 1,542 | 0 | 5 | 1997 | 39–16 | 70.9% | #10 | 1,987 | 0 | 7 |
| 26 | 1992 | 11–12 | 47.8% | #70 | 1,616 | 0 | 5 | 1998 | 8–8 | 50.0% | #77 | 1,932 | 0 | 7 |
| 27 | 1993 | 5–20 | 20.0% | #153 | 1,480 | 0 | 5 | 1999 | 17–13 | 56.7% | #38 | 1,890 | 0 | 7 |
| 28 | 1994 | 2–7 | 22.2% | #133 | 1,480 | 0 | 5 | 2000 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #136 | 1,869 | 0 | 7 |
| 29 | 1995 | 6–8 | 42.9% | #90 | 1,487 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 1996 | 4–5 | 44.4% | #181 | 1,537 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 1997 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #940 | 1,533 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |