H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 17:48 UTC
Eva Pfaff vs Elise Burgin H2H: 0-2
Elise Burgin holds a 2–0 lead over Eva Pfaff in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Elise Burgin leads 1–0 on grass and 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Elise Burgin won the 1988 US Open first round 6-3 RET.
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
0
–
2
2 main draw meetings
USA
Age 64
Left-Handed
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 31, 1988* | US Open | Grand Slam | R128 | Hard | Elise Burgin | 6-3 (ret.) | Eva Pfaff | Match data |
| Jun 20, 1984* | Eastbourne | WTA 250 | R64 | Grass | Elise Burgin | 6-3 6-3 | Eva Pfaff | 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 |
| Elise Burgin | #768 | #27 | 20 | 1,845 | 132 | 165 | 44.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
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 | Elise Burgin | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | 1977 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,481 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1980 | 0–2 | 0.0% | — | 1,475 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1980 | 12–11 | 52.2% | — | 1,609 | 0 | 0 | 1981 | 2–3 | 40.0% | — | 1,509 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1981 | 14–19 | 42.4% | — | 1,643 | 0 | 0 | 1982 | 7–10 | 41.2% | — | 1,585 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1982 | 18–22 | 45.0% | — | 1,777 | 0 | 0 | 1983 | 13–9 | 59.1% | — | 1,744 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1983 | 31–21 | 59.6% | — | 1,856 | 0 | 0 | 1984 | 9–15 | 37.5% | #51 | 1,715 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 1984 | 14–14 | 50.0% | #31 | 1,797 | 0 | 0 | 1985 | 29–23 | 55.8% | #52 | 1,772 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 1985 | 9–11 | 45.0% | #39 | 1,740 | 0 | 0 | 1986 | 25–22 | 53.2% | #40 | 1,776 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 1986 | 14–19 | 42.4% | #58 | 1,689 | 0 | 0 | 1987 | 17–21 | 44.7% | #66 | 1,709 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 1987 | 19–20 | 48.7% | #44 | 1,744 | 0 | 0 | 1988 | 5–12 | 29.4% | #108 | 1,632 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 1988 | 8–17 | 32.0% | #74 | 1,649 | 0 | 0 | 1989 | 16–19 | 45.7% | #62 | 1,701 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 1989 | 12–23 | 34.3% | #104 | 1,586 | 0 | 0 | 1990 | 7–19 | 26.9% | #149 | 1,569 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 1990 | 3–12 | 20.0% | #152 | 1,521 | 0 | 0 | 1991 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #299 | 1,528 | 0 | 1 |
| 30 | 1991 | 1–10 | 9.1% | #203 | 1,469 | 0 | 0 | 1992 | 2–5 | 28.6% | #166 | 1,524 | 0 | 1 |
| 31 | 1992 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #420 | 1,459 | 0 | 0 | 1993 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #400 | 1,497 | 0 | 1 |