H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Eva Pfaff vs Katerina Maleeva H2H: 1-1
Eva Pfaff and Katerina Maleeva are tied 1–1 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Eva Pfaff leads 1–0 on carpet, while Katerina Maleeva leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Katerina Maleeva won the 1989 Phoenix fourth round 6-3 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
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
BUL
Age 57
Right-Handed
168 cm / 5'6"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 15, 1989* | Phoenix | WTA 250 | R16 | Hard | Katerina Maleeva | 6-3 6-1 | Eva Pfaff | Match data |
| Oct 10, 1986* | Zurich | WTA 250 | R16 | Carpet | Eva Pfaff | 2-6 6-4 6-4 | Katerina Maleeva | 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 |
| Katerina Maleeva | #456 | #6 | 116 | 2,070 | 324 | 185 | 63.7% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 11 | 11 |
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 | Katerina Maleeva | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1984 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #93 | 1,528 | 0 | 0 |
| 16 | 1977 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,481 | 0 | 0 | 1985 | 30–20 | 60.0% | #28 | 1,813 | 0 | 2 |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1986 | 24–20 | 54.5% | #29 | 1,838 | 0 | 2 |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1987 | 35–15 | 70.0% | #13 | 1,948 | 0 | 4 |
| 19 | 1980 | 12–11 | 52.2% | — | 1,609 | 0 | 0 | 1988 | 35–16 | 68.6% | #11 | 1,992 | 0 | 5 |
| 20 | 1981 | 14–19 | 42.4% | — | 1,643 | 0 | 0 | 1989 | 32–11 | 74.4% | #15 | 1,940 | 0 | 8 |
| 21 | 1982 | 18–22 | 45.0% | — | 1,777 | 0 | 0 | 1990 | 47–16 | 74.6% | #6 | 2,039 | 0 | 9 |
| 22 | 1983 | 31–21 | 59.6% | — | 1,856 | 0 | 0 | 1991 | 35–16 | 68.6% | #11 | 1,967 | 0 | 10 |
| 23 | 1984 | 14–14 | 50.0% | #31 | 1,797 | 0 | 0 | 1992 | 30–18 | 62.5% | #16 | 1,906 | 0 | 10 |
| 24 | 1985 | 9–11 | 45.0% | #39 | 1,740 | 0 | 0 | 1993 | 28–17 | 62.2% | #22 | 1,898 | 0 | 10 |
| 25 | 1986 | 14–19 | 42.4% | #58 | 1,689 | 0 | 0 | 1994 | 20–16 | 55.6% | #36 | 1,866 | 0 | 11 |
| 26 | 1987 | 19–20 | 48.7% | #44 | 1,744 | 0 | 0 | 1995 | 1–11 | 8.3% | #302 | 1,679 | 0 | 11 |
| 27 | 1988 | 8–17 | 32.0% | #74 | 1,649 | 0 | 0 | 1996 | 5–7 | 41.7% | #231 | 1,686 | 0 | 11 |
| 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 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |