H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Beverly Bowes vs Mercedes Paz H2H: 0-1
Mercedes Paz holds a 1–0 lead over Beverly Bowes in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Mercedes Paz leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Mercedes Paz won the 1986 Montreal second round 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.
USA
Age 60
Right-Handed
193 cm / 6'4"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
ARG
Age 60
Right-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 6, 1986* | Montreal | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard | Mercedes Paz | 6-3 7-5 | Beverly Bowes | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beverly Bowes | #597 | #49 | 16 | 1,678 | 69 | 120 | 36.5% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Mercedes Paz | #521 | #28 | 185 | 1,822 | 144 | 182 | 44.2% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 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 | Beverly Bowes | Mercedes Paz | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 1983 | 3–6 | 33.3% | — | 1,526 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 1984 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #161 | 1,480 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 1985 | 6–6 | 50.0% | #170 | 1,525 | 0 | 0 | 1985 | 7–11 | 38.9% | #115 | 1,526 | 0 | 1 |
| 20 | 1986 | 6–8 | 42.9% | #100 | 1,586 | 0 | 0 | 1986 | 22–23 | 48.9% | #60 | 1,577 | 0 | 1 |
| 21 | 1987 | 7–18 | 28.0% | #75 | 1,591 | 0 | 0 | 1987 | 15–20 | 42.9% | #88 | 1,637 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 1988 | 14–19 | 42.4% | #62 | 1,640 | 0 | 0 | 1988 | 23–14 | 62.2% | #44 | 1,779 | 0 | 2 |
| 23 | 1989 | 13–19 | 40.6% | #101 | 1,619 | 0 | 0 | 1989 | 13–19 | 40.6% | #91 | 1,647 | 0 | 2 |
| 24 | 1990 | 5–13 | 27.8% | #147 | 1,536 | 0 | 0 | 1990 | 25–20 | 55.6% | #32 | 1,776 | 0 | 3 |
| 25 | 1991 | 2–5 | 28.6% | #156 | 1,520 | 0 | 0 | 1991 | 19–23 | 45.2% | #71 | 1,684 | 0 | 3 |
| 26 | 1992 | 3–8 | 27.3% | #113 | 1,510 | 0 | 0 | 1992 | 10–18 | 35.7% | #107 | 1,614 | 0 | 3 |
| 27 | 1993 | 8–11 | 42.1% | #130 | 1,550 | 0 | 0 | 1993 | 2–11 | 15.4% | #213 | 1,495 | 0 | 3 |
| 28 | 1994 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #426 | 1,556 | 0 | 0 | 1994 | 3–10 | 23.1% | #140 | 1,476 | 0 | 3 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1995 | 4–8 | 33.3% | #164 | 1,452 | 0 | 3 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1996 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #124 | 1,442 | 0 | 3 |