H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Conchita Martínez vs Kimiko Date Krumm H2H: 2-6
Kimiko Date Krumm holds a 6–2 lead over Conchita Martínez in their WTA head-to-head. Across 8 main-draw meetings, Kimiko Date Krumm leads 3–2 on hard courts and 2–0 on carpet. Most recently, Kimiko Date Krumm won the 1996 San Diego semifinal 6-2 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.
ESP
Age 54
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H
2
–
6
8 main draw meetings
Age 55
Right-Handed
163 cm / 5'4"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 24, 1996* | San Diego | WTA 500 | SF | Hard | Kimiko Date Krumm | 6-2 7-5 | Conchita Martínez | Match data |
| Jul 3, 1996* | Wimbledon | Grand Slam | R16 | Grass | Kimiko Date Krumm | 5-7 7-6 6-3 | Conchita Martínez | Match data |
| Mar 13, 1996* | Indian Wells | WTA 1000 | SF | Hard | Conchita Martínez | 6-0 6-4 | Kimiko Date Krumm | Match data |
| Feb 5, 1995* | Tokyo | WTA 1000 | QF | Carpet | Kimiko Date Krumm | 0-6 6-2 6-3 | Conchita Martínez | Match data |
| Nov 14, 1994 | Virginia Slims Championships | WTA Finals | QF | Carpet | Kimiko Date Krumm | 2-6 6-4 7-6 | Conchita Martínez | Match data |
| Jan 28, 1994* | Australian Open | Grand Slam | QF | Hard | Kimiko Date Krumm | 6-2 4-6 6-3 | Conchita Martínez | Match data |
| Jan 15, 1994* | Sydney | WTA 500 | QF | Hard | Kimiko Date Krumm | 6-3 6-0 | Conchita Martínez | Match data |
| Mar 6, 1992* | Boca Raton | WTA 1000 | R16 | Hard | Conchita Martínez | 6-1 7-6 | Kimiko Date Krumm | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Conchita Martínez | #1,498 | #2 | 3,180 | 2,263 | 669 | 275 | 70.9% | 1 | 9 | 0 | 4 | 19 | 33 |
| Kimiko Date Krumm | — | — | — | 2,091 | 241 | 188 | 56.2% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 4 | 8 |
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 | Conchita Martínez | Kimiko Date Krumm | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | 1988 | 14–6 | 70.0% | #41 | 1,730 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 1989 | 35–9 | 79.5% | #7 | 1,933 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 1990 | 38–10 | 79.2% | #11 | 2,063 | 0 | 7 | 1989 | 6–5 | 54.5% | — | 1,562 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1991 | 36–12 | 75.0% | #9 | 2,076 | 0 | 10 | 1990 | 10–7 | 58.8% | — | 1,664 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1992 | 44–16 | 73.3% | #8 | 2,054 | 0 | 11 | 1991 | 12–11 | 52.2% | — | 1,725 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1993 | 66–13 | 83.5% | #4 | 2,158 | 0 | 16 | 1992 | 26–13 | 66.7% | — | 1,867 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 1994 | 51–14 | 78.5% | #3 | 2,065 | 1 | 20 | 1993 | 25–11 | 69.4% | — | 1,956 | 0 | 2 |
| 23 | 1995 | 57–10 | 85.1% | #2 | 2,182 | 1 | 26 | 1994 | 32–12 | 72.7% | — | 1,987 | 0 | 4 |
| 24 | 1996 | 44–16 | 73.3% | #4 | 2,074 | 1 | 28 | 1995 | 39–12 | 76.5% | — | 2,029 | 0 | 5 |
| 25 | 1997 | 37–19 | 66.1% | #12 | 2,011 | 1 | 28 | 1996 | 31–13 | 70.5% | — | 2,071 | 0 | 7 |
| 26 | 1998 | 38–16 | 70.4% | #8 | 1,968 | 1 | 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 27 | 1999 | 38–22 | 63.3% | #15 | 1,898 | 1 | 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 2000 | 48–19 | 71.6% | #5 | 1,951 | 1 | 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 2001 | 19–13 | 59.4% | #35 | 1,852 | 1 | 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 2002 | 26–24 | 52.0% | #34 | 1,756 | 1 | 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 2003 | 29–21 | 58.0% | #18 | 1,756 | 1 | 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 2004 | 20–16 | 55.6% | #42 | 1,772 | 1 | 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 2005 | 29–19 | 60.4% | #31 | 1,812 | 1 | 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 37 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2008 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 2,042 | 0 | 7 |
| 38 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2009 | 6–11 | 35.3% | — | 1,841 | 0 | 8 |
| 39 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2010 | 19–18 | 51.4% | — | 1,814 | 0 | 8 |
| 40 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2011 | 7–24 | 22.6% | — | 1,567 | 0 | 8 |
| 41 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2012 | 2–14 | 12.5% | — | 1,454 | 0 | 8 |
| 42 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2013 | 12–15 | 44.4% | — | 1,575 | 0 | 8 |
| 43 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2014 | 11–14 | 44.0% | — | 1,597 | 0 | 8 |
| 44 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2015 | 3–6 | 33.3% | — | 1,574 | 0 | 8 |
| 46 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2017 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,564 | 0 | 8 |