H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Barbara Schett vs Sandrine Testud H2H: 0-3
Sandrine Testud holds a 3–0 lead over Barbara Schett in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Sandrine Testud leads 2–0 on clay and 1–0 on carpet. Most recently, Sandrine Testud won the 2002 Tokyo fourth round 4-6 7-5 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
–
3
3 main draw meetings
FRA
Age 54
Right-Handed
176 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 2, 2002* | Tokyo | WTA 1000 | R16 | Carpet | Sandrine Testud | 4-6 7-5 7-5 | Barbara Schett | Match data |
| May 7, 1998* | Rome | WTA 1000 | R32 | Clay | Sandrine Testud | 4-6 6-2 6-3 | Barbara Schett | Match data |
| Jul 19, 1997* | Palermo | WTA 250 | SF | Clay | Sandrine Testud | 0-6 6-3 7-6 | 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 |
| Sandrine Testud | #1,203 | #9 | 2,233 | 2,019 | 309 | 236 | 56.7% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
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 | Sandrine Testud | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 1994 | 9–14 | 39.1% | #100 | 1,531 | 0 | 0 | 1990 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #170 | 1,484 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1995 | 8–10 | 44.4% | #83 | 1,585 | 0 | 0 | 1991 | 8–10 | 44.4% | #109 | 1,546 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1996 | 23–18 | 56.1% | #32 | 1,759 | 0 | 1 | 1992 | 11–17 | 39.3% | #106 | 1,566 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1997 | 22–20 | 52.4% | #38 | 1,762 | 0 | 2 | 1993 | 11–19 | 36.7% | #100 | 1,560 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1998 | 34–26 | 56.7% | #23 | 1,822 | 0 | 2 | 1994 | 10–14 | 41.7% | #81 | 1,604 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 1999 | 46–23 | 66.7% | #8 | 1,936 | 0 | 2 | 1995 | 19–16 | 54.3% | #41 | 1,736 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2000 | 27–22 | 55.1% | #22 | 1,815 | 0 | 3 | 1996 | 21–17 | 55.3% | #41 | 1,771 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2001 | 29–25 | 53.7% | #21 | 1,757 | 0 | 3 | 1997 | 41–22 | 65.1% | #14 | 1,938 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2002 | 24–20 | 54.5% | #40 | 1,750 | 0 | 3 | 1998 | 51–26 | 66.2% | #14 | 1,946 | 0 | 2 |
| 27 | 2003 | 15–24 | 38.5% | #76 | 1,624 | 0 | 3 | 1999 | 36–25 | 59.0% | #13 | 1,900 | 0 | 2 |
| 28 | 2004 | 14–18 | 43.8% | #90 | 1,590 | 0 | 3 | 2000 | 30–20 | 60.0% | #17 | 1,916 | 0 | 2 |
| 29 | 2005 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #97 | 1,591 | 0 | 3 | 2001 | 53–27 | 66.2% | #11 | 1,976 | 0 | 3 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2002 | 17–14 | 54.8% | #38 | 1,845 | 0 | 3 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2004 | 1–7 | 12.5% | #313 | 1,739 | 0 | 3 |