H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Kim Jones vs Elise Burgin H2H: 1-1
Kim Jones and Elise Burgin are tied 1–1 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Kim Jones leads 1–0 on carpet, while Elise Burgin leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Kim Jones won the 1985 Dallas third round 5-7 7-6 7-6.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 14, 1985* | Dallas | WTA 250 | R32 | Carpet | Kim Jones | 5-7 7-6 7-6 | Elise Burgin | Match data |
| Aug 17, 1982* | Montreal | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard | Elise Burgin | 4-6 6-2 6-1 | Kim Jones | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kim Jones | — | — | — | 1,801 | 60 | 103 | 36.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Elise Burgin | #768 | #27 | 20 | 1,845 | 132 | 165 | 44.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 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 | Kim Jones | Elise Burgin | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1980 | 0–2 | 0.0% | — | 1,475 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1981 | 2–3 | 40.0% | — | 1,509 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1978 | 1–1 | 50.0% | — | 1,506 | 0 | 0 | 1982 | 7–10 | 41.2% | — | 1,585 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1979 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,490 | 0 | 0 | 1983 | 13–9 | 59.1% | — | 1,744 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1980 | 1–10 | 9.1% | — | 1,424 | 0 | 0 | 1984 | 9–15 | 37.5% | #51 | 1,715 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 1981 | 6–13 | 31.6% | — | 1,459 | 0 | 0 | 1985 | 29–23 | 55.8% | #52 | 1,772 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 1982 | 4–14 | 22.2% | — | 1,485 | 0 | 0 | 1986 | 25–22 | 53.2% | #40 | 1,776 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 1983 | 20–14 | 58.8% | — | 1,758 | 0 | 1 | 1987 | 17–21 | 44.7% | #66 | 1,709 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 1984 | 13–24 | 35.1% | — | 1,667 | 0 | 1 | 1988 | 5–12 | 29.4% | #108 | 1,632 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 1985 | 13–18 | 41.9% | — | 1,725 | 0 | 1 | 1989 | 16–19 | 45.7% | #62 | 1,701 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 1986 | 2–4 | 33.3% | — | 1,677 | 0 | 1 | 1990 | 7–19 | 26.9% | #149 | 1,569 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 1987 | 0–4 | 0.0% | — | 1,629 | 0 | 1 | 1991 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #299 | 1,528 | 0 | 1 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1992 | 2–5 | 28.6% | #166 | 1,524 | 0 | 1 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1993 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #400 | 1,497 | 0 | 1 |