H2H data updated: 2026-09-12 00:00 UTC

Anke Huber vs Lori Mcneil H2H: 5-1

Anke Huber holds a 5–1 lead over Lori Mcneil in their WTA head-to-head. Across 6 main-draw meetings, Anke Huber leads 3–0 on hard courts, while they are tied 1–1 on carpet. Most recently, Anke Huber won the 1997 Key Biscayne round of 64 6-3 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.

Anke Huber
GER Age 51 Right-Handed 173 cm / 5'8"
H2H
5 – 1
6 main-draw meetings
Lori Mcneil
USA Age 62 Right-Handed 170 cm / 5'7"

H2H Match Log

PlayerScorePlayerMatch DataDateRoundTournamentCategorySurface
Anke Huber #8 6-3 6-3 Lori Mcneil #105 Match data Mar 22, 1997* R64 Key Biscayne Tier I → modern equivalent WTA 1000 Hard
Lori Mcneil #63 6-4 6-7 7-6 Anke Huber #12 Match data Nov 11, 1995* SF Philadelphia Tier I → modern equivalent WTA 1000 Carpet
Anke Huber #9 6-4 2-6 7-5 Lori Mcneil #20 Match data Feb 3, 1995* R16 Pan Pacific Open Tier I → modern equivalent WTA 1000 Carpet
Anke Huber #10 4-6 6-3 7-6 Lori Mcneil #20 Match data Aug 20, 1993* R16 Canadian Open Tier I → modern equivalent WTA 1000 Hard
Anke Huber #10 6-1 3-6 7-5 Lori Mcneil #23 Match data May 27, 1993* R64 Roland Garros Grand Slam Clay
Anke Huber #21 6-4 6-1 Lori Mcneil #20 Match data Oct 17, 1991* R32 Porsche Tennis Grand Prix Tier II → modern equivalent WTA 500 Hard

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
Anke Huber #18 #4 2,721 2,122 398 205 66.0% 0 1 0 4 7 12
Lori Mcneil #867 #9 303 2,024 377 273 58.0% 0 0 0 1 10 11

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 Anke Huber Lori Mcneil
YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles
14 1989 1–1 50.0% #199 1,518 0 0 — — — — — — —
15 1990 14–9 60.9% #37 1,708 0 1 — — — — — — —
16 1991 30–13 69.8% #14 1,959 0 2 1980 0–1 0.0% — 1,484 0 0
17 1992 31–16 66.0% #11 1,973 0 2 1981 2–0 100.0% — 1,520 0 1
18 1993 41–15 73.2% #10 2,058 0 3 1982 1–2 33.3% — 1,503 0 1
19 1994 38–16 70.4% #12 2,030 0 6 1983 6–5 54.5% — 1,568 0 1
20 1995 41–15 73.2% #10 2,082 0 7 1984 7–11 38.9% #97 1,608 0 1
21 1996 47–16 74.6% #6 2,031 0 10 1985 13–23 36.1% #93 1,587 0 1
22 1997 34–24 58.6% #13 1,969 0 10 1986 42–22 65.6% #14 1,884 0 3
23 1998 25–18 58.1% #21 1,900 0 10 1987 54–24 69.2% #11 2,007 0 3
24 1999 32–26 55.2% #16 1,872 0 10 1988 46–20 69.7% #13 1,901 0 5
25 2000 29–16 64.4% #19 1,895 0 12 1989 24–22 52.2% #36 1,760 0 6
26 2001 35–20 63.6% #18 1,834 0 12 1990 17–20 45.9% #52 1,695 0 6
27 — — — — — — — 1991 39–21 65.0% #19 1,870 0 8
28 — — — — — — — 1992 37–20 64.9% #15 1,962 0 9
29 — — — — — — — 1993 27–19 58.7% #25 1,898 0 10
30 — — — — — — — 1994 26–15 63.4% #17 1,871 0 11
31 — — — — — — — 1995 19–19 50.0% #34 1,804 0 11
32 — — — — — — — 1996 8–14 36.4% #83 1,727 0 11
33 — — — — — — — 1997 1–7 12.5% #301 1,656 0 11
34 — — — — — — — 1998 8–6 57.1% #91 1,718 0 11
35 — — — — — — — 1999 0–2 0.0% #869 1,670 0 11

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 Anke Huber Lori Mcneil
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 %
14 1989 1 1 2 50.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
15 1990 8 4 12 66.7% 1 2 3 33.3% 1 1 2 50.0% 4 2 6 66.7% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
16 1991 15 6 21 71.4% 9 4 13 69.2% 3 1 4 75.0% 3 2 5 60.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
17 1992 10 5 15 66.7% 9 5 14 64.3% 2 1 3 66.7% 10 5 15 66.7% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
18 1993 16 7 23 69.6% 16 4 20 80.0% 3 1 4 75.0% 6 3 9 66.7% 1982 1 1 2 50.0% — — — — — — — — — — — —
19 1994 11 6 17 64.7% 13 4 17 76.5% 1 1 2 50.0% 13 5 18 72.2% 1983 5 3 8 62.5% — — — — 1 1 2 50.0% 0 1 1 0.0%
20 1995 19 8 27 70.4% 7 3 10 70.0% 3 1 4 75.0% 12 3 15 80.0% 1984 3 2 5 60.0% 1 3 4 25.0% 3 5 8 37.5% 0 1 1 0.0%
21 1996 21 8 29 72.4% 8 4 12 66.7% 7 1 8 87.5% 11 3 14 78.6% 1985 5 7 12 41.7% 3 7 10 30.0% 2 5 7 28.6% 3 4 7 42.9%
22 1997 17 10 27 63.0% 3 5 8 37.5% 4 2 6 66.7% 10 7 17 58.8% 1986 20 7 27 74.1% 4 5 9 44.4% 10 4 14 71.4% 8 6 14 57.1%
23 1998 17 10 27 63.0% 0 1 1 0.0% — — — — 8 7 15 53.3% 1987 19 6 25 76.0% 7 4 11 63.6% 9 6 15 60.0% 19 8 27 70.4%
24 1999 19 13 32 59.4% 4 3 7 57.1% 1 2 3 33.3% 8 8 16 50.0% 1988 22 10 32 68.8% 8 4 12 66.7% 12 3 15 80.0% 4 3 7 57.1%
25 2000 7 10 17 41.2% 18 4 22 81.8% 3 1 4 75.0% 1 1 2 50.0% 1989 10 8 18 55.6% 4 5 9 44.4% 4 4 8 50.0% 6 5 11 54.5%
26 2001 16 9 25 64.0% 8 6 14 57.1% 3 1 4 75.0% 8 4 12 66.7% 1990 8 11 19 42.1% 0 3 3 0.0% 8 3 11 72.7% 1 3 4 25.0%
27 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1991 24 10 34 70.6% 1 2 3 33.3% 6 3 9 66.7% 8 6 14 57.1%
28 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1992 13 9 22 59.1% 3 3 6 50.0% 10 2 12 83.3% 11 6 17 64.7%
29 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1993 11 8 19 57.9% 2 5 7 28.6% 10 2 12 83.3% 4 4 8 50.0%
30 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1994 6 6 12 50.0% 4 3 7 57.1% 11 2 13 84.6% 5 4 9 55.6%
31 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1995 4 7 11 36.4% 1 4 5 20.0% 7 3 10 70.0% 7 5 12 58.3%
32 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1996 3 6 9 33.3% 0 1 1 0.0% 4 3 7 57.1% 1 4 5 20.0%
33 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1997 1 4 5 20.0% 0 1 1 0.0% 0 2 2 0.0% — — — —
34 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1998 5 3 8 62.5% 1 2 3 33.3% 2 1 3 66.7% — — — —
35 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1999 0 2 2 0.0% — — — — — — — — — — — —
Career — 177 97 274 64.6% 96 45 141 68.1% 31 13 44 70.5% 94 50 144 65.3% — 160 110 270 59.3% 39 52 91 42.9% 99 49 148 66.9% 77 60 137 56.2%

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 Anke Huber Lori Mcneil
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
14 1989 1518 106.7 — — — — — — — 50.0% -0.34 1–1 1–0 — -0.14 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
15 1990 1709 138.4 — — — — +14 -175 — 57.7% +0.90 4–4 (50%) 2–2 (50%) 101.7 -0.06 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
16 1991 1959 161.7 — — — — -23 -215 -283 67.0% +1.21 6–5 (55%) 4–3 (57%) 104.1 -0.97 1980 1485 95.1 — — — — — — — 0.0% -4.50 — — — +0.17
17 1992 1974 163.5 — — — — +13 -112 -289 64.1% +1.16 7–6 (54%) 5–4 (56%) 102.2 -1.03 1981 1521 104.9 — — — — — — — 100.0% +4.50 — — — +0.24
18 1993 2059 162.3 — — — — -40 -16 -298 66.1% +0.98 13–4 (76%) 7–6 (54%) 107.2 -1.91 1982 1503 100.0 — — — — — — — 42.9% -0.14 0–1 0–1 — +0.35
19 1994 2030 158.8 — — — — -9 +18 — 64.5% +1.13 12–6 (67%) 6–4 (60%) 102.9 +0.55 1983 1569 107.1 — — — — +44 — — 53.8% +0.19 2–2 (50%) 0–1 — +1.06
20 1995 2083 168.0 — — — — +12 -34 -316 66.2% +1.32 13–4 (76%) 6–5 (55%) 103.3 -1.78 1984 1608 115.2 — — — — +12 -54 +10 38.1% -0.81 4–2 (67%) 1–1 — +0.27
21 1996 2032 160.5 — — — — +30 -42 -104 66.2% +1.29 17–6 (74%) 7–10 (41%) 99.9 +2.81 1985 1587 118.3 — — — — +22 -103 +5 39.2% -0.85 2–5 (29%) 3–5 (38%) 96.4 -0.20
22 1997 1969 163.8 — — — — +39 -72 -51 57.6% +0.58 12–10 (55%) 5–6 (45%) 96.0 -1.85 1986 1884 144.9 — — — — -9 -341 -107 60.5% +0.68 16–10 (62%) 12–9 (57%) 109.2 +1.49
23 1998 1900 158.7 — — — — +4 — — 55.0% +0.39 9–7 (56%) 3–7 (30%) 93.2 -0.86 1987 2007 158.4 — — — — +54 -355 -205 63.8% +0.91 16–9 (64%) 12–1 (92%) 109.8 -0.78
24 1999 1872 155.9 — — — — +5 -59 -11 52.6% +0.17 11–10 (52%) 5–5 (50%) 97.6 -1.51 1988 1901 142.6 — — — — +37 -185 +39 62.9% +0.76 19–10 (66%) 8–5 (62%) 105.0 +2.06
25 2000 1896 145.4 — — — — -95 +65 +31 60.0% +0.73 10–7 (59%) 7–7 (50%) 99.9 +0.44 1989 1760 134.7 — — — — +60 -78 +79 52.0% +0.07 5–7 (42%) 5–6 (45%) 96.3 -0.23
26 2001 1834 151.0 — — — — +12 +62 +138 62.2% +0.78 8–9 (47%) 8–4 (67%) 99.3 +0.22 1990 1695 134.9 — — — — +14 -74 +200 48.2% -0.08 4–9 (31%) 5–6 (45%) 90.4 -0.80
27 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1991 1870 151.0 — — — — +12 -241 +42 60.4% +0.77 13–6 (68%) 9–10 (47%) 104.2 -0.74
28 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1992 1962 156.8 — — — — -4 -303 +76 63.6% +0.94 8–10 (44%) 10–9 (53%) 96.7 -0.46
29 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1993 1899 147.7 — — — — -6 -291 +192 58.1% +0.61 6–7 (46%) 3–9 (25%) 95.3 -0.38
30 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1994 1871 145.9 — — — — -58 -207 +244 61.1% +0.69 7–8 (47%) 7–5 (58%) 98.9 -0.52
31 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1995 1805 142.2 — — — — -13 -206 +304 53.8% +0.38 5–12 (29%) 4–8 (33%) 91.4 -0.26
32 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1996 1727 130.2 — — — — -12 — +384 36.5% -0.65 5–3 (63%) 2–7 (22%) 96.5 -0.48
33 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1997 1656 120.2 — — — — +31 — — 22.2% -1.61 0–2 0–1 — -1.12
34 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1998 1719 129.4 — — — — +1 -154 +315 51.4% +0.09 5–2 (71%) 0–2 — -0.58
35 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1999 1671 99.0 — — — — — — — 20.0% -0.80 0–1 0–1 — +0.18
Career — 2123 165.4 — — — — +2 -32 -124 61.8% +0.88 123–79 (61%) 66–63 (51%) 100.5 -1.02 — 2025 149.2 — — — — +14 -212 +86 56.0% +0.41 117–106 (52%) 81–87 (48%) 98.3 -0.11

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.