H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Brenda Schultz-Mccarthy vs Liz Smylie H2H: 1-1
Brenda Schultz-Mccarthy and Liz Smylie are tied 1–1 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on grass. Most recently, Brenda Schultz-Mccarthy won the 1994 Birmingham third round 6-3 6-2.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
NED
Age 55
Right-Handed
188 cm / 6'2"
H2H
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
AUS
Age 63
Right-Handed
166 cm / 5'5"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 9, 1994* | Birmingham | WTA 250 | R32 | Grass | Brenda Schultz-Mccarthy | 6-3 6-2 | Liz Smylie | Match data |
| Jun 22, 1989* | Eastbourne | WTA 250 | R32 | Grass | Liz Smylie | 3-6 6-4 6-4 | Brenda Schultz-Mccarthy | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Brenda Schultz-Mccarthy | #919 | #9 | 1,672 | 2,025 | 295 | 220 | 57.3% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 7 |
| 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 | Brenda Schultz-Mccarthy | Liz Smylie | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 15 | 1986 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,490 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 16 | 1987 | 5–6 | 45.5% | #149 | 1,515 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 1988 | 21–18 | 53.8% | #40 | 1,689 | 0 | 0 | 1980 | 11–4 | 73.3% | — | 1,641 | 0 | 1 |
| 18 | 1989 | 15–22 | 40.5% | #83 | 1,603 | 0 | 0 | 1981 | 2–10 | 16.7% | — | 1,528 | 0 | 1 |
| 19 | 1990 | 18–17 | 51.4% | #43 | 1,677 | 0 | 0 | 1982 | 15–8 | 65.2% | — | 1,634 | 0 | 3 |
| 20 | 1991 | 24–19 | 55.8% | #30 | 1,799 | 0 | 1 | 1983 | 20–14 | 58.8% | — | 1,758 | 0 | 4 |
| 21 | 1992 | 30–20 | 60.0% | #33 | 1,818 | 0 | 2 | 1984 | 13–18 | 41.9% | #36 | 1,766 | 0 | 4 |
| 22 | 1993 | 26–20 | 56.5% | #40 | 1,789 | 0 | 3 | 1985 | 16–19 | 45.7% | #43 | 1,730 | 0 | 4 |
| 23 | 1994 | 44–21 | 67.7% | #15 | 1,885 | 0 | 3 | 1986 | 6–13 | 31.6% | #114 | 1,669 | 0 | 4 |
| 24 | 1995 | 37–15 | 71.2% | #13 | 1,970 | 0 | 5 | 1987 | 20–14 | 58.8% | #27 | 1,747 | 0 | 5 |
| 25 | 1996 | 35–18 | 66.0% | #12 | 1,908 | 0 | 6 | 1988 | 4–11 | 26.7% | #153 | 1,597 | 0 | 5 |
| 26 | 1997 | 34–25 | 57.6% | #15 | 1,855 | 0 | 7 | 1989 | 21–22 | 48.8% | #66 | 1,679 | 0 | 5 |
| 27 | 1998 | 3–10 | 23.1% | #188 | 1,673 | 0 | 7 | 1990 | 15–16 | 48.4% | #53 | 1,664 | 0 | 5 |
| 28 | 1999 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #893 | 1,651 | 0 | 7 | 1991 | 9–16 | 36.0% | #116 | 1,612 | 0 | 5 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1992 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #209 | 1,599 | 0 | 5 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1993 | 7–15 | 31.8% | #125 | 1,550 | 0 | 5 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1994 | 2–7 | 22.2% | #192 | 1,515 | 0 | 5 |
| 35 | 2006 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #299 | 1,642 | 0 | 7 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 36 | 2007 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #190 | 1,614 | 0 | 7 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 37 | 2008 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #391 | 1,592 | 0 | 7 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |