H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 08:25 UTC
Gigi Fernandez vs Kimiko Date Krumm H2H: 2-0
Gigi Fernandez holds a 2–0 lead over Kimiko Date Krumm in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Gigi Fernandez leads 1–0 on carpet and 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Gigi Fernandez won the 1992 Wimbledon second round 6-1 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.
USA
Age 62
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H
2
–
0
2 main draw meetings
Age 55
Right-Handed
163 cm / 5'4"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 26, 1992* | Wimbledon | Grand Slam | R64 | Grass | Gigi Fernandez | 6-1 6-3 | Kimiko Date Krumm | Match data |
| Feb 1, 1990* | Tokyo Pan Pacific | WTA 250 | R32 | Carpet | Gigi Fernandez | 6-1 6-4 | Kimiko Date Krumm | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gigi Fernandez | #181 | #17 | 247 | 1,912 | 227 | 217 | 51.1% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| Kimiko Date Krumm | — | — | — | 2,091 | 241 | 188 | 56.2% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 4 | 8 |
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 | Gigi Fernandez | Kimiko Date Krumm | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 18 | 1982 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,484 | 0 | 0 | 1989 | 6–5 | 54.5% | — | 1,562 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1983 | 4–8 | 33.3% | — | 1,524 | 0 | 0 | 1990 | 10–7 | 58.8% | — | 1,664 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1984 | 18–16 | 52.9% | #27 | 1,723 | 0 | 0 | 1991 | 12–11 | 52.2% | — | 1,725 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1985 | 9–18 | 33.3% | #64 | 1,655 | 0 | 0 | 1992 | 26–13 | 66.7% | — | 1,867 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 1986 | 17–14 | 54.8% | #57 | 1,729 | 0 | 1 | 1993 | 25–11 | 69.4% | — | 1,956 | 0 | 2 |
| 23 | 1987 | 16–17 | 48.5% | #39 | 1,681 | 0 | 1 | 1994 | 32–12 | 72.7% | — | 1,987 | 0 | 4 |
| 24 | 1988 | 15–18 | 45.5% | #53 | 1,684 | 0 | 1 | 1995 | 39–12 | 76.5% | — | 2,029 | 0 | 5 |
| 25 | 1989 | 23–15 | 60.5% | #23 | 1,810 | 0 | 1 | 1996 | 31–13 | 70.5% | — | 2,071 | 0 | 7 |
| 26 | 1990 | 18–14 | 56.2% | #36 | 1,765 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 27 | 1991 | 30–18 | 62.5% | #22 | 1,809 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 1992 | 22–16 | 57.9% | #32 | 1,806 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 1993 | 17–17 | 50.0% | #50 | 1,730 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 1994 | 17–17 | 50.0% | #32 | 1,789 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 1995 | 11–13 | 45.8% | #65 | 1,738 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 1996 | 7–12 | 36.8% | #112 | 1,687 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 1997 | 3–3 | 50.0% | #180 | 1,707 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 37 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2008 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 2,042 | 0 | 7 |
| 38 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2009 | 6–11 | 35.3% | — | 1,841 | 0 | 8 |
| 39 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2010 | 19–18 | 51.4% | — | 1,814 | 0 | 8 |
| 40 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2011 | 7–24 | 22.6% | — | 1,567 | 0 | 8 |
| 41 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2012 | 2–14 | 12.5% | — | 1,454 | 0 | 8 |
| 42 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2013 | 12–15 | 44.4% | — | 1,575 | 0 | 8 |
| 43 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2014 | 11–14 | 44.0% | — | 1,597 | 0 | 8 |
| 44 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2015 | 3–6 | 33.3% | — | 1,574 | 0 | 8 |
| 46 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2017 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,564 | 0 | 8 |