H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Heather Ludloff vs Kimberly Po Messerli H2H: 0-1
Kimberly Po Messerli holds a 1–0 lead over Heather Ludloff in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Kimberly Po Messerli leads 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Kimberly Po Messerli won the 1992 Birmingham second round 7-6 6-4.
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 65
Right-Handed
165 cm / 5'5"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
Age 54
Right-Handed
160 cm / 5'3"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 10, 1992* | Birmingham | WTA 250 | R64 | Grass | Kimberly Po Messerli | 7-6 6-4 | Heather Ludloff | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Heather Ludloff | #512 | #69 | 11 | 1,576 | 48 | 106 | 31.2% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kimberly Po Messerli | — | — | — | 1,878 | 118 | 133 | 47.0% | 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 | Heather Ludloff | Kimberly Po Messerli | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 1978 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,488 | 0 | 0 | 1989 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,486 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 1979 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,483 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 1980 | 2–5 | 28.6% | — | 1,465 | 0 | 0 | 1991 | 5–4 | 55.6% | — | 1,568 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1981 | 0–2 | 0.0% | — | 1,440 | 0 | 0 | 1992 | 14–16 | 46.7% | — | 1,655 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1982 | 3–4 | 42.9% | — | 1,473 | 0 | 0 | 1993 | 20–19 | 51.3% | — | 1,776 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1983 | 7–15 | 31.8% | — | 1,516 | 0 | 0 | 1994 | 11–17 | 39.3% | — | 1,701 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 1984 | 6–9 | 40.0% | #129 | 1,546 | 0 | 0 | 1995 | 4–13 | 23.5% | — | 1,609 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 1985 | 2–12 | 14.3% | #127 | 1,489 | 0 | 0 | 1996 | 20–13 | 60.6% | — | 1,806 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 1986 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #192 | 1,475 | 0 | 0 | 1997 | 27–20 | 57.4% | — | 1,789 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 1987 | 12–16 | 42.9% | #74 | 1,543 | 0 | 0 | 1998 | 11–15 | 42.3% | — | 1,742 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 1988 | 6–14 | 30.0% | #123 | 1,505 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 6–13 | 31.6% | — | 1,653 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 1989 | 4–9 | 30.8% | #164 | 1,468 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 0–2 | 0.0% | — | 1,611 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 1990 | 2–6 | 25.0% | #219 | 1,456 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 1991 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #141 | 1,503 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 1992 | 1–6 | 14.3% | #282 | 1,472 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |