H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Eva Pfaff vs Carling Bassett Seguso H2H: 2-2
Eva Pfaff and Carling Bassett Seguso are tied 2–2 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 4 main-draw meetings, Eva Pfaff leads 2–1 on hard courts, while Carling Bassett Seguso leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Eva Pfaff won the 1986 Montreal third round 3-6 6-1 6-1.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
GER
Age 65
Right-Handed
173 cm / 5'8"
H2H
2
–
2
4 main draw meetings
Age 58
168 cm / 5'6"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 7, 1986* | Montreal | WTA 1000 | R32 | Hard | Eva Pfaff | 3-6 6-1 6-1 | Carling Bassett Seguso | Match data |
| Jul 28, 1985* | Manhattan Beach | WTA 250 | QF | Hard | Carling Bassett Seguso | 4-6 6-3 6-2 | Eva Pfaff | Match data |
| Apr 15, 1983* | Amelia Island | WTA 250 | R16 | Clay | Carling Bassett Seguso | 6-1 4-6 7-5 | Eva Pfaff | Match data |
| Aug 18, 1982* | Montreal | WTA 1000 | R32 | Hard | Eva Pfaff | 3-6 6-2 6-3 | Carling Bassett Seguso | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Eva Pfaff | #420 | #17 | 21 | 1,902 | 155 | 202 | 43.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Carling Bassett Seguso | — | — | — | 2,009 | 149 | 101 | 59.6% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
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 | Eva Pfaff | Carling Bassett Seguso | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 14 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1982 | 2–3 | 40.0% | — | 1,521 | 0 | 0 |
| 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1983 | 35–21 | 62.5% | — | 1,828 | 0 | 1 |
| 16 | 1977 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,481 | 0 | 0 | 1984 | 37–20 | 64.9% | — | 1,939 | 0 | 1 |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1985 | 30–17 | 63.8% | — | 1,881 | 0 | 1 |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1986 | 18–12 | 60.0% | — | 1,847 | 0 | 1 |
| 19 | 1980 | 12–11 | 52.2% | — | 1,609 | 0 | 0 | 1987 | 16–12 | 57.1% | — | 1,831 | 0 | 2 |
| 20 | 1981 | 14–19 | 42.4% | — | 1,643 | 0 | 0 | 1988 | 4–6 | 40.0% | — | 1,783 | 0 | 2 |
| 21 | 1982 | 18–22 | 45.0% | — | 1,777 | 0 | 0 | 1989 | 3–4 | 42.9% | — | 1,765 | 0 | 2 |
| 22 | 1983 | 31–21 | 59.6% | — | 1,856 | 0 | 0 | 1990 | 3–3 | 50.0% | — | 1,768 | 0 | 2 |
| 23 | 1984 | 14–14 | 50.0% | #31 | 1,797 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 24 | 1985 | 9–11 | 45.0% | #39 | 1,740 | 0 | 0 | 1992 | 1–3 | 25.0% | — | 1,735 | 0 | 2 |
| 25 | 1986 | 14–19 | 42.4% | #58 | 1,689 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 26 | 1987 | 19–20 | 48.7% | #44 | 1,744 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 27 | 1988 | 8–17 | 32.0% | #74 | 1,649 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 1989 | 12–23 | 34.3% | #104 | 1,586 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 1990 | 3–12 | 20.0% | #152 | 1,521 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 1991 | 1–10 | 9.1% | #203 | 1,469 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 1992 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #420 | 1,459 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |