H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 17:48 UTC
Gail Sherriff vs Francoise Durr H2H: 3-1
Gail Sherriff holds a 3–1 lead over Francoise Durr in their WTA head-to-head. Across 4 main-draw meetings, Gail Sherriff leads 3–1 on clay. Most recently, Gail Sherriff won the 1971 Venice quarterfinal 4-6 6-3 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.
FRA
Age 81
Right-Handed
H2H
3
–
1
4 main draw meetings
FRA
Age 83
Right-Handed
162 cm / 5'4"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 7, 1971* | Venice | WTA 250 | QF | Clay | Gail Sherriff | 4-6 6-3 7-5 | Francoise Durr | Match data |
| Oct 11, 1970* | Paris Closed | WTA 250 | F | Clay | Gail Sherriff | 9-7 6-2 | Francoise Durr | Match data |
| May 11, 1969* | Brussels | WTA 250 | QF | Clay | Francoise Durr | 3-6 7-5 9-7 | Gail Sherriff | Match data |
| Jun 4, 1968* | Roland Garros | Grand Slam | R16 | Clay | Gail Sherriff | 6-3 6-3 | Francoise Durr | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gail Sherriff | — | — | — | 1,978 | 342 | 145 | 70.2% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 41 | 41 |
| Francoise Durr | — | — | — | 2,144 | 373 | 235 | 61.3% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 9 | 9 |
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 | Gail Sherriff | Francoise Durr | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 23 | 1968 | 65–14 | 82.3% | — | 1,847 | 0 | 13 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 24 | 1969 | 45–22 | 67.2% | — | 1,800 | 0 | 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 25 | 1970 | 52–19 | 73.2% | — | 1,933 | 0 | 21 | 1968 | 20–10 | 66.7% | — | 1,677 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 1971 | 49–20 | 71.0% | — | 1,921 | 0 | 23 | 1969 | 37–18 | 67.3% | — | 1,816 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 1972 | 35–13 | 72.9% | — | 1,860 | 0 | 28 | 1970 | 47–26 | 64.4% | — | 1,970 | 0 | 2 |
| 28 | 1973 | 3–7 | 30.0% | — | 1,758 | 0 | 28 | 1971 | 86–36 | 70.5% | — | 2,112 | 0 | 7 |
| 29 | 1974 | 30–10 | 75.0% | — | 1,877 | 0 | 34 | 1972 | 50–25 | 66.7% | — | 2,017 | 0 | 8 |
| 30 | 1975 | 17–10 | 63.0% | — | 1,833 | 0 | 38 | 1973 | 32–21 | 60.4% | — | 2,056 | 0 | 9 |
| 31 | 1976 | 18–10 | 64.3% | — | 1,793 | 0 | 38 | 1974 | 27–17 | 61.4% | — | 2,036 | 0 | 9 |
| 32 | 1977 | 0–3 | 0.0% | — | 1,755 | 0 | 38 | 1975 | 28–18 | 60.9% | — | 1,995 | 0 | 9 |
| 33 | 1978 | 15–6 | 71.4% | — | 1,772 | 0 | 39 | 1976 | 18–20 | 47.4% | — | 1,913 | 0 | 9 |
| 34 | 1979 | 1–4 | 20.0% | — | 1,721 | 0 | 39 | 1977 | 13–20 | 39.4% | — | 1,833 | 0 | 9 |
| 35 | 1980 | 9–5 | 64.3% | — | 1,704 | 0 | 40 | 1978 | 12–11 | 52.2% | — | 1,824 | 0 | 9 |
| 36 | 1981 | 3–1 | 75.0% | — | 1,711 | 0 | 41 | 1979 | 3–12 | 20.0% | — | 1,704 | 0 | 9 |
| 37 | 1982 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,701 | 0 | 41 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 38 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1981 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,701 | 0 | 9 |