H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Kate Latham vs Kate Gompert H2H: 2-0
Kate Latham holds a 2–0 lead over Kate Gompert in their WTA head-to-head. They have met 2 times in main draws. Most recently, Kate Latham won the 1981 Berkeley semifinal 6-2 6-1.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 4, 1981* | Berkeley | WTA 250 | SF | — | Kate Latham | 6-2 6-1 | Kate Gompert | Match data |
| May 5, 1980* | Berkeley | WTA 250 | SF | — | Kate Latham | 7-6 6-3 | Kate Gompert | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kate Latham | — | — | — | 1,866 | 198 | 202 | 49.5% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 6 |
| Kate Gompert | #316 | #18 | 34 | 1,870 | 85 | 81 | 51.2% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
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 | Kate Latham | Kate Gompert | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | 1969 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,489 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 1970 | 1–3 | 25.0% | — | 1,476 | 0 | 0 | 1980 | 3–2 | 60.0% | — | 1,538 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1981 | 4–3 | 57.1% | — | 1,584 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1972 | 3–3 | 50.0% | — | 1,503 | 0 | 0 | 1982 | 7–7 | 50.0% | — | 1,569 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1973 | 6–7 | 46.2% | — | 1,587 | 0 | 0 | 1983 | 6–3 | 66.7% | — | 1,660 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1974 | 40–16 | 71.4% | — | 1,844 | 0 | 3 | 1984 | 4–5 | 44.4% | #98 | 1,642 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1975 | 15–20 | 42.9% | — | 1,690 | 0 | 3 | 1985 | 11–8 | 57.9% | — | 1,710 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 1976 | 4–2 | 66.7% | — | 1,680 | 0 | 3 | 1986 | 21–21 | 50.0% | #35 | 1,778 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 1977 | 15–12 | 55.6% | — | 1,755 | 0 | 3 | 1987 | 25–18 | 58.1% | #22 | 1,829 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 1978 | 13–17 | 43.3% | — | 1,661 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 26 | 1979 | 21–23 | 47.7% | — | 1,848 | 0 | 3 | 1989 | 3–11 | 21.4% | #175 | 1,659 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 1980 | 23–22 | 51.1% | — | 1,750 | 0 | 4 | 1990 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #301 | 1,621 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 1981 | 21–20 | 51.2% | — | 1,774 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 1982 | 24–28 | 46.2% | — | 1,688 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 1983 | 9–16 | 36.0% | — | 1,625 | 0 | 6 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 1984 | 0–11 | 0.0% | — | 1,494 | 0 | 6 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 1985 | 3–1 | 75.0% | — | 1,528 | 0 | 6 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |