H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Julie Halard-Decugis vs Kimiko Date Krumm H2H: 0-2
Kimiko Date Krumm holds a 2–0 lead over Julie Halard-Decugis in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Kimiko Date Krumm leads 1–0 on clay and 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Kimiko Date Krumm won the 1995 German Open fourth round 6-2 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.
FRA
Age 55
Right-Handed
173 cm / 5'8"
H2H
0
–
2
2 main draw meetings
Age 55
Right-Handed
163 cm / 5'4"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 19, 1995* | German Open | WTA 1000 | R16 | Clay | Kimiko Date Krumm | 6-2 6-3 | Julie Halard-Decugis | Match data |
| Sep 26, 1993* | Tokyo Nichirei | WTA 250 | SF | Hard | Kimiko Date Krumm | 6-1 7-6 | Julie Halard-Decugis | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Julie Halard-Decugis | #15 | #7 | 2,030 | 2,003 | 337 | 219 | 60.6% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 9 | 12 |
| Kimiko Date Krumm | — | — | — | 2,091 | 241 | 188 | 56.2% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 4 | 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 | Julie Halard-Decugis | Kimiko Date Krumm | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | 1987 | 9–5 | 64.3% | #62 | 1,643 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 1988 | 11–15 | 42.3% | #75 | 1,613 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 1989 | 10–16 | 38.5% | #118 | 1,625 | 0 | 0 | 1989 | 6–5 | 54.5% | — | 1,562 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1990 | 20–16 | 55.6% | #41 | 1,708 | 0 | 0 | 1990 | 10–7 | 58.8% | — | 1,664 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1991 | 44–23 | 65.7% | #20 | 1,821 | 0 | 1 | 1991 | 12–11 | 52.2% | — | 1,725 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1992 | 22–13 | 62.9% | #27 | 1,837 | 0 | 2 | 1992 | 26–13 | 66.7% | — | 1,867 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 1993 | 26–18 | 59.1% | #29 | 1,821 | 0 | 2 | 1993 | 25–11 | 69.4% | — | 1,956 | 0 | 2 |
| 23 | 1994 | 38–21 | 64.4% | #21 | 1,890 | 0 | 3 | 1994 | 32–12 | 72.7% | — | 1,987 | 0 | 4 |
| 24 | 1995 | 19–15 | 55.9% | #50 | 1,770 | 0 | 4 | 1995 | 39–12 | 76.5% | — | 2,029 | 0 | 5 |
| 25 | 1996 | 28–10 | 73.7% | #20 | 1,856 | 0 | 6 | 1996 | 31–13 | 70.5% | — | 2,071 | 0 | 7 |
| 26 | 1997 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #178 | 1,843 | 0 | 6 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 27 | 1998 | 34–21 | 61.8% | #22 | 1,917 | 0 | 8 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 1999 | 47–22 | 68.1% | #9 | 1,920 | 0 | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 2000 | 29–23 | 55.8% | #15 | 1,829 | 0 | 12 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 37 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2008 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 2,042 | 0 | 7 |
| 38 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2009 | 6–11 | 35.3% | — | 1,841 | 0 | 8 |
| 39 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2010 | 19–18 | 51.4% | — | 1,814 | 0 | 8 |
| 40 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2011 | 7–24 | 22.6% | — | 1,567 | 0 | 8 |
| 41 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2012 | 2–14 | 12.5% | — | 1,454 | 0 | 8 |
| 42 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2013 | 12–15 | 44.4% | — | 1,575 | 0 | 8 |
| 43 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2014 | 11–14 | 44.0% | — | 1,597 | 0 | 8 |
| 44 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2015 | 3–6 | 33.3% | — | 1,574 | 0 | 8 |
| 46 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2017 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,564 | 0 | 8 |