H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Barbara Schett vs Miriam Oremans H2H: 0-1
Miriam Oremans holds a 1–0 lead over Barbara Schett in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Miriam Oremans leads 1–0 on carpet. Most recently, Miriam Oremans won the 1997 Hanover third round 4-6 6-3 7-5.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
AUT
Age 50
Right-Handed
176 cm / 5'9"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
NED
Age 53
Right-Handed
169 cm / 5'7"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 20, 1997* | Hanover | WTA 250 | R32 | Carpet | Miriam Oremans | 4-6 6-3 7-5 | Barbara Schett | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Barbara Schett | #97 | #7 | 2,188 | 1,975 | 256 | 227 | 53.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
| Miriam Oremans | #193 | #25 | 585 | 1,809 | 161 | 181 | 47.1% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
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 | Barbara Schett | Miriam Oremans | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 15 | 1991 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,491 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 16 | 1992 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #290 | 1,487 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 1993 | 4–4 | 50.0% | #137 | 1,547 | 0 | 0 | 1990 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #185 | 1,519 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 1994 | 9–14 | 39.1% | #100 | 1,531 | 0 | 0 | 1991 | 3–9 | 25.0% | #149 | 1,471 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1995 | 8–10 | 44.4% | #83 | 1,585 | 0 | 0 | 1992 | 8–12 | 40.0% | #130 | 1,532 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1996 | 23–18 | 56.1% | #32 | 1,759 | 0 | 1 | 1993 | 28–20 | 58.3% | #31 | 1,747 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1997 | 22–20 | 52.4% | #38 | 1,762 | 0 | 2 | 1994 | 14–18 | 43.8% | #48 | 1,733 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1998 | 34–26 | 56.7% | #23 | 1,822 | 0 | 2 | 1995 | 19–18 | 51.4% | #42 | 1,769 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 1999 | 46–23 | 66.7% | #8 | 1,936 | 0 | 2 | 1996 | 17–18 | 48.6% | #46 | 1,714 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2000 | 27–22 | 55.1% | #22 | 1,815 | 0 | 3 | 1997 | 15–15 | 50.0% | #46 | 1,774 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2001 | 29–25 | 53.7% | #21 | 1,757 | 0 | 3 | 1998 | 13–16 | 44.8% | #57 | 1,729 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2002 | 24–20 | 54.5% | #40 | 1,750 | 0 | 3 | 1999 | 8–17 | 32.0% | #98 | 1,628 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2003 | 15–24 | 38.5% | #76 | 1,624 | 0 | 3 | 2000 | 16–12 | 57.1% | #64 | 1,701 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2004 | 14–18 | 43.8% | #90 | 1,590 | 0 | 3 | 2001 | 13–15 | 46.4% | #84 | 1,686 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2005 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #97 | 1,591 | 0 | 3 | 2002 | 6–10 | 37.5% | #124 | 1,611 | 0 | 0 |