H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 17:48 UTC
Betsy Nagelsen vs Liz Smylie H2H: 2-1
Betsy Nagelsen holds a 2–1 lead over Liz Smylie in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on hard courts, while Betsy Nagelsen leads 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Liz Smylie won the 1990 Key Biscayne second round 6-2 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.
USA
Age 69
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H
2
–
1
3 main draw meetings
AUS
Age 63
Right-Handed
166 cm / 5'5"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 18, 1990* | Key Biscayne | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard | Liz Smylie | 6-2 6-4 | Betsy Nagelsen | Match data |
| Aug 3, 1989* | San Diego | WTA 500 | R32 | Hard | Betsy Nagelsen | 7-5 4-6 6-3 | Liz Smylie | Match data |
| Jan 3, 1987* | Brisbane | WTA 500 | QF | Grass | Betsy Nagelsen | 3-6 6-2 6-3 | Liz Smylie | 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 |
| Liz Smylie | #501 | #20 | 29 | 1,824 | 161 | 188 | 46.1% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 5 |
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 | Liz Smylie | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1980 | 11–4 | 73.3% | — | 1,641 | 0 | 1 |
| 18 | 1975 | 18–17 | 51.4% | — | 1,793 | 0 | 3 | 1981 | 2–10 | 16.7% | — | 1,528 | 0 | 1 |
| 19 | 1976 | 11–19 | 36.7% | — | 1,709 | 0 | 3 | 1982 | 15–8 | 65.2% | — | 1,634 | 0 | 3 |
| 20 | 1977 | 8–15 | 34.8% | — | 1,677 | 0 | 3 | 1983 | 20–14 | 58.8% | — | 1,758 | 0 | 4 |
| 21 | 1978 | 13–24 | 35.1% | — | 1,659 | 0 | 3 | 1984 | 13–18 | 41.9% | #36 | 1,766 | 0 | 4 |
| 22 | 1979 | 18–19 | 48.6% | — | 1,695 | 0 | 5 | 1985 | 16–19 | 45.7% | #43 | 1,730 | 0 | 4 |
| 23 | 1980 | 22–27 | 44.9% | — | 1,756 | 0 | 5 | 1986 | 6–13 | 31.6% | #114 | 1,669 | 0 | 4 |
| 24 | 1981 | 20–21 | 48.8% | — | 1,803 | 0 | 6 | 1987 | 20–14 | 58.8% | #27 | 1,747 | 0 | 5 |
| 25 | 1982 | 12–17 | 41.4% | — | 1,704 | 0 | 6 | 1988 | 4–11 | 26.7% | #153 | 1,597 | 0 | 5 |
| 26 | 1983 | 18–22 | 45.0% | — | 1,692 | 0 | 6 | 1989 | 21–22 | 48.8% | #66 | 1,679 | 0 | 5 |
| 27 | 1984 | 11–18 | 37.9% | #77 | 1,630 | 0 | 6 | 1990 | 15–16 | 48.4% | #53 | 1,664 | 0 | 5 |
| 28 | 1985 | 14–12 | 53.8% | #81 | 1,714 | 0 | 6 | 1991 | 9–16 | 36.0% | #116 | 1,612 | 0 | 5 |
| 29 | 1986 | 18–17 | 51.4% | #46 | 1,699 | 0 | 6 | 1992 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #209 | 1,599 | 0 | 5 |
| 30 | 1987 | 13–15 | 46.4% | #61 | 1,645 | 0 | 6 | 1993 | 7–15 | 31.8% | #125 | 1,550 | 0 | 5 |
| 31 | 1988 | 11–19 | 36.7% | #109 | 1,586 | 0 | 6 | 1994 | 2–7 | 22.2% | #192 | 1,515 | 0 | 5 |
| 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 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |