H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC

Jill Craybas vs Amy Frazier H2H: 2-1

Jill Craybas holds a 2–1 lead over Amy Frazier in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on clay, while Jill Craybas leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Jill Craybas won the 2006 Los Angeles second round 6-2 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.

Jill Craybas
USA Age 52 Right-Handed 160 cm / 5'3"
H2H
2 – 1
3 main draw meetings
Amy Frazier
USA Age 53 Right-Handed 175 cm / 5'9"

H2H Match Log

DateTournamentCategoryRoundSurfaceWinnerScoreLoserMatch
Aug 9, 2006* Los Angeles WTA 500 R64 Hard Jill Craybas #51 6-2 6-4 Amy Frazier #46 Match data
Apr 18, 2001* Charleston WTA 1000 R64 Clay Amy Frazier #24 6-4 6-1 Jill Craybas #96 Match data
Apr 12, 2001* Amelia Island WTA 500 R32 Clay Jill Craybas #112 6-2 6-2 Amy Frazier #24 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
Jill Craybas #336 #39 974 1,695 161 256 38.6% 0 0 0 0 1 1
Amy Frazier #450 #13 1,381 1,959 416 307 57.5% 0 0 0 3 5 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 Jill Craybas Amy Frazier
YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles
14 — — — — — — — 1987 3–4 42.9% #147 1,527 0 0
15 — — — — — — — 1988 12–15 44.4% #58 1,638 0 0
16 — — — — — — — 1989 23–15 60.5% #33 1,725 0 1
17 — — — — — — — 1990 31–14 68.9% #16 1,893 0 2
18 — — — — — — — 1991 25–18 58.1% #28 1,813 0 2
19 — — — — — — — 1992 33–17 66.0% #19 1,842 0 3
20 — — — — — — — 1993 10–9 52.6% #39 1,843 0 3
21 1996 0–1 0.0% — 1,488 0 0 1994 28–15 65.1% #16 1,903 0 4
22 — — — — — — — 1995 26–15 63.4% #18 1,877 0 5
23 1998 0–1 0.0% #154 1,473 0 0 1996 20–16 55.6% #33 1,835 0 5
24 1999 0–4 0.0% #175 1,445 0 0 1997 17–17 50.0% #37 1,818 0 5
25 2000 1–2 33.3% #145 1,449 0 0 1998 12–13 48.0% #42 1,766 0 5
26 2001 8–17 32.0% #98 1,479 0 0 1999 31–19 62.0% #19 1,876 0 6
27 2002 19–15 55.9% #57 1,652 0 1 2000 30–22 57.7% #20 1,852 0 6
28 2003 16–22 42.1% #99 1,568 0 1 2001 19–19 50.0% #48 1,695 0 6
29 2004 12–21 36.4% #59 1,499 0 1 2002 19–18 51.4% #39 1,757 0 6
30 2005 19–23 45.2% #48 1,614 0 1 2003 14–13 51.9% #61 1,746 0 6
31 2006 18–25 41.9% #70 1,569 0 1 2004 35–17 67.3% #26 1,828 0 7
32 2007 12–27 30.8% #79 1,472 0 1 2005 18–16 52.9% #52 1,730 0 8
33 2008 22–25 46.8% #64 1,575 0 1 2006 10–15 40.0% #130 1,626 0 8
34 2009 12–21 36.4% #76 1,592 0 1 — — — — — — —
35 2010 12–23 34.3% #98 1,546 0 1 — — — — — — —
36 2011 6–20 23.1% #150 1,442 0 1 — — — — — — —
37 2012 3–7 30.0% #189 1,449 0 1 — — — — — — —
38 2013 1–2 33.3% #336 1,451 0 1 — — — — — — —