H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Anna-Lena Groenefeld vs Jill Craybas H2H: 1-1
Anna-Lena Groenefeld and Jill Craybas are tied 1–1 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Jill Craybas leads 1–0 on clay, while Anna-Lena Groenefeld leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Jill Craybas won the 2010 Bastad fourth round 3-6 6-0 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.
GER
Right-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
USA
Age 52
Right-Handed
160 cm / 5'3"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 9, 2010* | Bastad | WTA 250 | R16 | Clay | Jill Craybas | 3-6 6-0 6-4 | Anna-Lena Groenefeld | Match data |
| Mar 24, 2009* | Miami | WTA 1000 | R128 | Hard | Anna-Lena Groenefeld | 6-4 6-1 | Jill Craybas | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Anna-Lena Groenefeld | #1,012 | #14 | 1,365 | 1,856 | 109 | 130 | 45.6% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Jill Craybas | #336 | #39 | 974 | 1,695 | 161 | 256 | 38.6% | 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.
| Anna-Lena Groenefeld | Jill Craybas | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles |
| 2003 | 3–6 | 33.3% | #118 | 1,515 | 0 | 0 | 1996 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,488 | 0 | 0 |
| 2004 | 7–15 | 31.8% | #68 | 1,478 | 0 | 0 | 1998 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #154 | 1,473 | 0 | 0 |
| 2005 | 36–26 | 58.1% | #21 | 1,786 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #175 | 1,445 | 0 | 0 |
| 2006 | 30–26 | 53.6% | #19 | 1,656 | 0 | 1 | 2000 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #145 | 1,449 | 0 | 0 |
| 2007 | 4–14 | 22.2% | #204 | 1,527 | 0 | 1 | 2001 | 8–17 | 32.0% | #98 | 1,479 | 0 | 0 |
| 2008 | 7–7 | 50.0% | #76 | 1,596 | 0 | 1 | 2002 | 19–15 | 55.9% | #57 | 1,652 | 0 | 1 |
| 2009 | 18–23 | 43.9% | #65 | 1,655 | 0 | 1 | 2003 | 16–22 | 42.1% | #99 | 1,568 | 0 | 1 |
| 2010 | 4–11 | 26.7% | #166 | 1,563 | 0 | 1 | 2004 | 12–21 | 36.4% | #59 | 1,499 | 0 | 1 |
| 2011 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #266 | 1,542 | 0 | 1 | 2005 | 19–23 | 45.2% | #48 | 1,614 | 0 | 1 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2006 | 18–25 | 41.9% | #70 | 1,569 | 0 | 1 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2007 | 12–27 | 30.8% | #79 | 1,472 | 0 | 1 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2008 | 22–25 | 46.8% | #64 | 1,575 | 0 | 1 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2009 | 12–21 | 36.4% | #76 | 1,592 | 0 | 1 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2010 | 12–23 | 34.3% | #98 | 1,546 | 0 | 1 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2011 | 6–20 | 23.1% | #150 | 1,442 | 0 | 1 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2012 | 3–7 | 30.0% | #189 | 1,449 | 0 | 1 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2013 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #336 | 1,451 | 0 | 1 |