H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Judith Wiesner vs Nathalie Herreman H2H: 1-0
Judith Wiesner holds a 1–0 lead over Nathalie Herreman in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Judith Wiesner leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Judith Wiesner won the 1987 Rome second round 3-6 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.
AUT
Age 60
Right-Handed
172 cm / 5'8"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
FRA
Age 60
Left-Handed
164 cm / 5'5"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 6, 1987* | Rome | WTA 1000 | R64 | Clay | Judith Wiesner | 3-6 6-1 6-3 | Nathalie Herreman | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Judith Wiesner | #48 | #12 | 1,590 | 1,979 | 302 | 177 | 63.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Nathalie Herreman | #886 | #42 | 20 | 1,728 | 103 | 154 | 40.1% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
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 | Judith Wiesner | Nathalie Herreman | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1982 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,492 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1983 | 4–3 | 57.1% | — | 1,548 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1984 | 8–12 | 40.0% | #125 | 1,564 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1985 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,491 | 0 | 0 | 1985 | 3–6 | 33.3% | #126 | 1,543 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1986 | 3–3 | 50.0% | #141 | 1,514 | 0 | 0 | 1986 | 16–11 | 59.3% | #42 | 1,718 | 0 | 1 |
| 21 | 1987 | 19–13 | 59.4% | #33 | 1,696 | 0 | 0 | 1987 | 11–20 | 35.5% | #91 | 1,641 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 1988 | 22–17 | 56.4% | #33 | 1,751 | 0 | 1 | 1988 | 8–12 | 40.0% | #95 | 1,606 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 1989 | 22–14 | 61.1% | #35 | 1,736 | 0 | 2 | 1989 | 8–17 | 32.0% | #134 | 1,568 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 1990 | 41–19 | 68.3% | #17 | 1,845 | 0 | 2 | 1990 | 19–20 | 48.7% | #62 | 1,684 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 1991 | 28–14 | 66.7% | #16 | 1,962 | 0 | 2 | 1991 | 12–21 | 36.4% | #121 | 1,619 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 1992 | 29–17 | 63.0% | #25 | 1,916 | 0 | 3 | 1992 | 6–16 | 27.3% | #183 | 1,556 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 1993 | 30–17 | 63.8% | #21 | 1,906 | 0 | 3 | 1993 | 7–9 | 43.8% | #107 | 1,622 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 1994 | 28–15 | 65.1% | #25 | 1,893 | 0 | 4 | 1994 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #181 | 1,584 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 1995 | 28–14 | 66.7% | #25 | 1,914 | 0 | 5 | 1995 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #386 | 1,580 | 0 | 1 |
| 30 | 1996 | 35–22 | 61.4% | #15 | 1,925 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 1997 | 17–11 | 60.7% | #48 | 1,829 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |