H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 04:32 UTC
Jil Teichmann vs Alison Van Uytvanck H2H: 1-0
Jil Teichmann holds a 1–0 lead over Alison Van Uytvanck in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Jil Teichmann leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Jil Teichmann won the 2022 Doha third round 7-6(9) 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.
SUI
Age 29
Left-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
BEL
Age 32
Right-Handed
173 cm / 5'8"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 23, 2022* | Doha | WTA 1000 | R32 | Hard | Jil Teichmann | 7-6(9) 7-5 | Alison Van Uytvanck | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jil Teichmann | #119 | #21 | 2,101 | 1,876 | 98 | 107 | 47.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| Alison Van Uytvanck | #229 | #37 | 1,355 | 1,765 | 119 | 147 | 44.7% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 5 |
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 | Jil Teichmann | Alison Van Uytvanck | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2011 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #287 | 1,510 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2016 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #209 | 1,524 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 2–1 | 66.7% | #199 | 1,554 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2017 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #139 | 1,523 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #112 | 1,524 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2018 | 3–6 | 33.3% | #148 | 1,531 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 10–17 | 37.0% | #106 | 1,528 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2019 | 14–11 | 56.0% | #69 | 1,632 | 0 | 2 | 2015 | 19–18 | 51.4% | #44 | 1,649 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2020 | 9–12 | 42.9% | #57 | 1,671 | 0 | 2 | 2016 | 4–13 | 23.5% | #121 | 1,517 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2021 | 23–20 | 53.5% | #37 | 1,766 | 0 | 2 | 2017 | 8–7 | 53.3% | #76 | 1,619 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 2022 | 19–21 | 47.5% | #35 | 1,690 | 0 | 2 | 2018 | 18–21 | 46.2% | #49 | 1,650 | 0 | 2 |
| 25 | 2023 | 11–20 | 35.5% | #147 | 1,613 | 0 | 2 | 2019 | 24–19 | 55.8% | #47 | 1,713 | 0 | 4 |
| 26 | 2024 | 3–2 | 60.0% | #135 | 1,633 | 0 | 2 | 2020 | 7–11 | 38.9% | #64 | 1,663 | 0 | 4 |
| 27 | 2025 | 8–9 | 47.1% | #123 | 1,651 | 0 | 2 | 2021 | 13–14 | 48.1% | #58 | 1,752 | 0 | 5 |
| 28 | 2026 | 6–2 | 75.0% | #119 | 1,709 | 0 | 2 | 2022 | 9–13 | 40.9% | #72 | 1,679 | 0 | 5 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2023 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #344 | 1,682 | 0 | 5 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2024 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #229 | 1,607 | 0 | 5 |