H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Claudia Kohde Kilsch vs Heather Ludloff H2H: 1-0
Claudia Kohde Kilsch holds a 1–0 lead over Heather Ludloff in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Claudia Kohde Kilsch leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Claudia Kohde Kilsch won the 1992 Indian Wells second round 4-6 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.
Age 62
Right-Handed
187 cm / 6'2"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
USA
Age 65
Right-Handed
165 cm / 5'5"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 26, 1992* | Indian Wells | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard | Claudia Kohde Kilsch | 4-6 6-3 7-5 | Heather Ludloff | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claudia Kohde Kilsch | #387 | #4 | 77 | 2,157 | 401 | 233 | 63.2% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 10 | 12 |
| Heather Ludloff | #512 | #69 | 11 | 1,576 | 48 | 106 | 31.2% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
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 | Claudia Kohde Kilsch | Heather Ludloff | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 13 | 1977 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,484 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 15 | 1979 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,480 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 16 | 1980 | 36–18 | 66.7% | — | 1,755 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 1981 | 40–22 | 64.5% | — | 1,841 | 0 | 5 | 1978 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,488 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 1982 | 34–23 | 59.6% | — | 1,914 | 0 | 8 | 1979 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,483 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1983 | 29–20 | 59.2% | — | 1,871 | 0 | 8 | 1980 | 2–5 | 28.6% | — | 1,465 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1984 | 42–16 | 72.4% | #8 | 2,014 | 0 | 9 | 1981 | 0–2 | 0.0% | — | 1,440 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1985 | 49–19 | 72.1% | #5 | 2,115 | 0 | 10 | 1982 | 3–4 | 42.9% | — | 1,473 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1986 | 39–17 | 69.6% | #7 | 2,049 | 0 | 10 | 1983 | 7–15 | 31.8% | — | 1,516 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 1987 | 35–16 | 68.6% | #10 | 1,994 | 0 | 10 | 1984 | 6–9 | 40.0% | #129 | 1,546 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 1988 | 39–18 | 68.4% | #12 | 1,952 | 0 | 11 | 1985 | 2–12 | 14.3% | #127 | 1,489 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 1989 | 16–13 | 55.2% | #37 | 1,856 | 0 | 11 | 1986 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #192 | 1,475 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 1990 | 17–16 | 51.5% | #46 | 1,792 | 0 | 12 | 1987 | 12–16 | 42.9% | #74 | 1,543 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 1991 | 14–19 | 42.4% | #85 | 1,682 | 0 | 12 | 1988 | 6–14 | 30.0% | #123 | 1,505 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 1992 | 11–14 | 44.0% | #78 | 1,647 | 0 | 12 | 1989 | 4–9 | 30.8% | #164 | 1,468 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1990 | 2–6 | 25.0% | #219 | 1,456 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1991 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #141 | 1,503 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1992 | 1–6 | 14.3% | #282 | 1,472 | 0 | 0 |