H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Eva Pfaff vs Louise Field H2H: 1-2
Louise Field holds a 2–1 lead over Eva Pfaff in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on hard courts, while Louise Field leads 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Eva Pfaff won the 1991 Australian Open first round 7-6(6) 3-6 6-3.
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
–
2
3 main draw meetings
AUS
Age 59
Right-Handed
198 cm / 6'6"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 16, 1991* | Australian Open | Grand Slam | R128 | Hard | Eva Pfaff | 7-6(6) 3-6 6-3 | Louise Field | Match data |
| Jan 11, 1989* | Sydney | WTA 500 | R64 | Hard | Louise Field | 7-6 6-2 | Eva Pfaff | Match data |
| Jun 22, 1988* | Wimbledon | Grand Slam | R128 | Grass | Louise Field | 7-5 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 |
| Louise Field | #752 | #96 | 12 | 1,579 | 58 | 121 | 32.4% | 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 | Eva Pfaff | Louise Field | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1982 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,488 | 0 | 0 |
| 16 | 1977 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,481 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1984 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #248 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1985 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #106 | 1,518 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1980 | 12–11 | 52.2% | — | 1,609 | 0 | 0 | 1986 | 4–10 | 28.6% | #157 | 1,479 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1981 | 14–19 | 42.4% | — | 1,643 | 0 | 0 | 1987 | 11–17 | 39.3% | #113 | 1,470 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1982 | 18–22 | 45.0% | — | 1,777 | 0 | 0 | 1988 | 4–13 | 23.5% | #163 | 1,421 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1983 | 31–21 | 59.6% | — | 1,856 | 0 | 0 | 1989 | 12–20 | 37.5% | #100 | 1,545 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 1984 | 14–14 | 50.0% | #31 | 1,797 | 0 | 0 | 1990 | 9–17 | 34.6% | #125 | 1,523 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 1985 | 9–11 | 45.0% | #39 | 1,740 | 0 | 0 | 1991 | 3–14 | 17.6% | #193 | 1,436 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 1986 | 14–19 | 42.4% | #58 | 1,689 | 0 | 0 | 1992 | 5–9 | 35.7% | #170 | 1,450 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 1987 | 19–20 | 48.7% | #44 | 1,744 | 0 | 0 | 1993 | 5–10 | 33.3% | #175 | 1,471 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 1988 | 8–17 | 32.0% | #74 | 1,649 | 0 | 0 | 1994 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #197 | 1,477 | 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 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |