H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Anna-Lena Groenefeld vs Nathalie Dechy H2H: 1-2
Nathalie Dechy holds a 2–1 lead over Anna-Lena Groenefeld in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on hard courts, while Nathalie Dechy leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Nathalie Dechy won the 2008 Quebec City third round 6-3 6-1.
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
–
2
3 main draw meetings
FRA
Age 47
Right-Handed
178 cm / 5'10"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 30, 2008* | Quebec City | WTA 500 | R32 | Hard | Nathalie Dechy | 6-3 6-1 | Anna-Lena Groenefeld | Match data |
| May 16, 2007* | Rome | WTA 1000 | R64 | Clay | Nathalie Dechy | 6-0 6-4 | Anna-Lena Groenefeld | Match data |
| Jul 30, 2005* | Stanford | WTA 500 | QF | Hard | Anna-Lena Groenefeld | 2-6 6-2 6-3 | Nathalie Dechy | 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 |
| Nathalie Dechy | #88 | #11 | 1,773 | 1,917 | 291 | 270 | 51.9% | 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 | Nathalie Dechy | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1995 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #237 | 1,481 | 0 | 0 |
| 2004 | 7–15 | 31.8% | #68 | 1,478 | 0 | 0 | 1996 | 6–11 | 35.3% | #84 | 1,501 | 0 | 0 |
| 2005 | 36–26 | 58.1% | #21 | 1,786 | 0 | 0 | 1997 | 6–11 | 35.3% | #73 | 1,539 | 0 | 0 |
| 2006 | 30–26 | 53.6% | #19 | 1,656 | 0 | 1 | 1998 | 12–17 | 41.4% | #50 | 1,619 | 0 | 0 |
| 2007 | 4–14 | 22.2% | #204 | 1,527 | 0 | 1 | 1999 | 32–23 | 58.2% | #25 | 1,790 | 0 | 0 |
| 2008 | 7–7 | 50.0% | #76 | 1,596 | 0 | 1 | 2000 | 28–19 | 59.6% | #26 | 1,777 | 0 | 0 |
| 2009 | 18–23 | 43.9% | #65 | 1,655 | 0 | 1 | 2001 | 21–25 | 45.7% | #43 | 1,626 | 0 | 0 |
| 2010 | 4–11 | 26.7% | #166 | 1,563 | 0 | 1 | 2002 | 33–24 | 57.9% | #20 | 1,770 | 0 | 0 |
| 2011 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #266 | 1,542 | 0 | 1 | 2003 | 31–18 | 63.3% | #29 | 1,819 | 0 | 1 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2004 | 33–23 | 58.9% | #21 | 1,810 | 0 | 1 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2005 | 40–26 | 60.6% | #12 | 1,798 | 0 | 1 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2006 | 16–25 | 39.0% | #48 | 1,649 | 0 | 1 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2007 | 16–19 | 45.7% | #68 | 1,651 | 0 | 1 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2008 | 13–16 | 44.8% | #69 | 1,670 | 0 | 1 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2009 | 4–11 | 26.7% | #88 | 1,582 | 0 | 1 |