H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 14:16 UTC
Jo Durie vs Laura Arraya H2H: 2-1
Jo Durie holds a 2–1 lead over Laura Arraya in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on clay, while Jo Durie leads 1–0 on carpet. Most recently, Jo Durie won the 1986 Brighton third round 6-1 4-6 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.
GBR
Age 65
Right-Handed
163 cm / 5'4"
H2H
2
–
1
3 main draw meetings
PER
Age 62
Right-Handed
173 cm / 5'8"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 23, 1986* | Brighton | WTA 250 | R32 | Carpet | Jo Durie | 6-1 4-6 6-4 | Laura Arraya | Match data |
| May 31, 1984* | Roland Garros | Grand Slam | R64 | Clay | Laura Arraya | 6-2 5-7 6-4 | Jo Durie | Match data |
| May 20, 1982* | Berlin | WTA 500 | R32 | Clay | Jo Durie | 6-4 6-4 | Laura Arraya | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jo Durie | #302 | #5 | 31 | 2,099 | 314 | 264 | 54.3% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 8 | 9 |
| Laura Arraya | #192 | #14 | 51 | 1,922 | 270 | 204 | 57.0% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 9 | 10 |
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 | Jo Durie | Laura Arraya | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 14 | 1975 | 1–1 | 50.0% | — | 1,498 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 15 | 1976 | 5–6 | 45.5% | — | 1,503 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 16 | 1977 | 11–7 | 61.1% | — | 1,601 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 1978 | 18–10 | 64.3% | — | 1,618 | 0 | 1 | 1981 | 19–8 | 70.4% | — | 1,683 | 0 | 4 |
| 18 | 1979 | 15–8 | 65.2% | — | 1,713 | 0 | 3 | 1982 | 33–17 | 66.0% | — | 1,741 | 0 | 7 |
| 19 | 1980 | 21–14 | 60.0% | — | 1,734 | 0 | 4 | 1983 | 23–23 | 50.0% | — | 1,713 | 0 | 7 |
| 20 | 1981 | 30–14 | 68.2% | — | 1,860 | 0 | 7 | 1984 | 29–18 | 61.7% | #34 | 1,760 | 0 | 8 |
| 21 | 1982 | 25–20 | 55.6% | — | 1,841 | 0 | 7 | 1985 | 17–21 | 44.7% | #63 | 1,693 | 0 | 8 |
| 22 | 1983 | 47–18 | 72.3% | — | 2,093 | 0 | 9 | 1986 | 23–24 | 48.9% | #33 | 1,718 | 0 | 8 |
| 23 | 1984 | 16–15 | 51.6% | #24 | 1,889 | 0 | 9 | 1987 | 16–14 | 53.3% | #45 | 1,770 | 0 | 8 |
| 24 | 1985 | 17–19 | 47.2% | #26 | 1,799 | 0 | 9 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 25 | 1986 | 24–17 | 58.5% | #24 | 1,842 | 0 | 9 | 1989 | 27–12 | 69.2% | #19 | 1,882 | 0 | 10 |
| 26 | 1987 | 10–17 | 37.0% | #73 | 1,741 | 0 | 9 | 1990 | 26–19 | 57.8% | #21 | 1,821 | 0 | 10 |
| 27 | 1988 | 19–19 | 50.0% | #60 | 1,704 | 0 | 9 | 1991 | 28–17 | 62.2% | #24 | 1,823 | 0 | 10 |
| 28 | 1989 | 8–13 | 38.1% | #117 | 1,621 | 0 | 9 | 1992 | 20–19 | 51.3% | #45 | 1,734 | 0 | 10 |
| 29 | 1990 | 13–13 | 50.0% | #64 | 1,674 | 0 | 9 | 1993 | 9–12 | 42.9% | #71 | 1,683 | 0 | 10 |
| 30 | 1991 | 15–18 | 45.5% | #62 | 1,717 | 0 | 9 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 1992 | 13–16 | 44.8% | #59 | 1,693 | 0 | 9 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 1993 | 4–12 | 25.0% | #192 | 1,562 | 0 | 9 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 1994 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #348 | 1,554 | 0 | 9 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 34 | 1995 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #292 | 1,547 | 0 | 9 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |