H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Betsy Nagelsen vs Jill Hetherington H2H: 0-1
Jill Hetherington holds a 1–0 lead over Betsy Nagelsen in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Jill Hetherington leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Jill Hetherington won the 1988 Key Biscayne first round 7-5 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.
USA
Age 69
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
CAN
Age 61
Right-Handed
163 cm / 5'4"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 15, 1988* | Key Biscayne | WTA 250 | R128 | Hard | Jill Hetherington | 7-5 6-3 | Betsy Nagelsen | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Betsy Nagelsen | #692 | #25 | 28 | 1,885 | 266 | 324 | 45.1% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 6 |
| Jill Hetherington | #748 | #64 | 12 | 1,645 | 30 | 57 | 34.5% | 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.
| Age | Betsy Nagelsen | Jill Hetherington | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 15 | 1972 | 4–2 | 66.7% | — | 1,537 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 16 | 1973 | 1–3 | 25.0% | — | 1,517 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 1974 | 27–18 | 60.0% | — | 1,730 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 1975 | 18–17 | 51.4% | — | 1,793 | 0 | 3 | 1983 | 1–1 | 50.0% | — | 1,507 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1976 | 11–19 | 36.7% | — | 1,709 | 0 | 3 | 1984 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #121 | 1,543 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1977 | 8–15 | 34.8% | — | 1,677 | 0 | 3 | 1985 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #118 | 1,523 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1978 | 13–24 | 35.1% | — | 1,659 | 0 | 3 | 1986 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #386 | 1,537 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1979 | 18–19 | 48.6% | — | 1,695 | 0 | 5 | 1987 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #169 | 1,534 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 1980 | 22–27 | 44.9% | — | 1,756 | 0 | 5 | 1988 | 14–18 | 43.8% | #81 | 1,562 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 1981 | 20–21 | 48.8% | — | 1,803 | 0 | 6 | 1989 | 8–17 | 32.0% | #122 | 1,528 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 1982 | 12–17 | 41.4% | — | 1,704 | 0 | 6 | 1990 | 1–6 | 14.3% | #247 | 1,479 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 1983 | 18–22 | 45.0% | — | 1,692 | 0 | 6 | 1991 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #245 | 1,473 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 1984 | 11–18 | 37.9% | #77 | 1,630 | 0 | 6 | 1992 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #277 | 1,456 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 1985 | 14–12 | 53.8% | #81 | 1,714 | 0 | 6 | 1993 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #468 | 1,436 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 1986 | 18–17 | 51.4% | #46 | 1,699 | 0 | 6 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 1987 | 13–15 | 46.4% | #61 | 1,645 | 0 | 6 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 1988 | 11–19 | 36.7% | #109 | 1,586 | 0 | 6 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 1989 | 18–15 | 54.5% | #45 | 1,663 | 0 | 6 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 1990 | 8–12 | 40.0% | #96 | 1,640 | 0 | 6 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 34 | 1991 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #337 | 1,608 | 0 | 6 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 35 | 1992 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #418 | 1,561 | 0 | 6 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 36 | 1993 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #394 | 1,512 | 0 | 6 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 37 | 1994 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #692 | 1,510 | 0 | 6 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |