H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 08:25 UTC
Catherine Tanvier vs Andrea Temesvari H2H: 1-1
Catherine Tanvier and Andrea Temesvari are tied 1–1 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Andrea Temesvari leads 1–0 on carpet, while Catherine Tanvier leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Andrea Temesvari won the 1985 Oakland fourth round 7-5 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.
FRA
Age 61
Right-Handed
174 cm / 5'9"
H2H
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
HUN
Age 60
Right-Handed
182 cm / 6'0"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 22, 1985* | Oakland | WTA 250 | R16 | Carpet | Andrea Temesvari | 7-5 6-4 | Catherine Tanvier | Match data |
| Jul 24, 1981* | Monaco | WTA 250 | R16 | Clay | Catherine Tanvier | 6-2 6-2 | Andrea Temesvari | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Catherine Tanvier | #752 | #20 | 22 | 1,877 | 161 | 179 | 47.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Andrea Temesvari | #932 | #7 | 109 | 2,021 | 185 | 178 | 51.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 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 | Catherine Tanvier | Andrea Temesvari | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 15 | 1980 | 4–2 | 66.7% | — | 1,545 | 0 | 0 | 1981 | 11–6 | 64.7% | — | 1,626 | 0 | 1 |
| 16 | 1981 | 6–14 | 30.0% | — | 1,540 | 0 | 0 | 1982 | 18–14 | 56.2% | — | 1,772 | 0 | 1 |
| 17 | 1982 | 23–19 | 54.8% | — | 1,791 | 0 | 0 | 1983 | 42–15 | 73.7% | — | 1,988 | 0 | 4 |
| 18 | 1983 | 17–16 | 51.5% | — | 1,824 | 0 | 0 | 1984 | 24–16 | 60.0% | #14 | 1,888 | 0 | 4 |
| 19 | 1984 | 21–18 | 53.8% | #30 | 1,777 | 0 | 0 | 1985 | 18–12 | 60.0% | #16 | 1,847 | 0 | 5 |
| 20 | 1985 | 18–16 | 52.9% | #39 | 1,775 | 0 | 0 | 1986 | 11–12 | 47.8% | #43 | 1,787 | 0 | 5 |
| 21 | 1986 | 19–17 | 52.8% | #37 | 1,825 | 0 | 0 | 1987 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #193 | 1,762 | 0 | 5 |
| 22 | 1987 | 10–19 | 34.5% | #96 | 1,618 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 23 | 1988 | 9–16 | 36.0% | #77 | 1,602 | 0 | 0 | 1989 | 18–15 | 54.5% | #43 | 1,752 | 0 | 5 |
| 24 | 1989 | 12–12 | 50.0% | #65 | 1,673 | 0 | 0 | 1990 | 8–19 | 29.6% | #117 | 1,612 | 0 | 5 |
| 25 | 1990 | 9–11 | 45.0% | #99 | 1,658 | 0 | 0 | 1991 | 6–14 | 30.0% | #159 | 1,542 | 0 | 5 |
| 26 | 1991 | 7–10 | 41.2% | #104 | 1,603 | 0 | 0 | 1992 | 11–12 | 47.8% | #70 | 1,616 | 0 | 5 |
| 27 | 1992 | 6–7 | 46.2% | #105 | 1,614 | 0 | 0 | 1993 | 5–20 | 20.0% | #153 | 1,480 | 0 | 5 |
| 28 | 1993 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #543 | 1,578 | 0 | 0 | 1994 | 2–7 | 22.2% | #133 | 1,480 | 0 | 5 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1995 | 6–8 | 42.9% | #90 | 1,487 | 0 | 5 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1996 | 4–5 | 44.4% | #181 | 1,537 | 0 | 5 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1997 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #940 | 1,533 | 0 | 5 |