H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 17:48 UTC
Laura Dupont vs Heidi Eisterlehner H2H: 2-1
Laura Dupont holds a 2–1 lead over Heidi Eisterlehner in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Heidi Eisterlehner leads 1–0 on carpet, while Laura Dupont leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Heidi Eisterlehner won the 1981 Chicago second round 6-4 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.
USA
Right-Handed
160 cm / 5'3"
H2H
2
–
1
3 main draw meetings
GER
Right-Handed
172 cm / 5'8"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 28, 1981* | Chicago | WTA 250 | R64 | Carpet | Heidi Eisterlehner | 6-4 6-3 | Laura Dupont | Match data |
| May 15, 1977* | Hamburg | WTA 250 | F | Clay | Laura Dupont | 6-1 6-4 | Heidi Eisterlehner | Match data |
| Nov 27, 1976* | Johannesburg | WTA 250 | SF | Hard | Laura Dupont | 6-0 6-1 | Heidi Eisterlehner | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Laura Dupont | — | — | — | 1,893 | 216 | 244 | 47.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 6 |
| Heidi Eisterlehner | — | — | — | 1,774 | 112 | 127 | 46.9% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
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 | Laura Dupont | Heidi Eisterlehner | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 19 | 1968 | 6–11 | 35.3% | — | 1,496 | 0 | 0 | 1969 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,486 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1969 | 2–4 | 33.3% | — | 1,494 | 0 | 0 | 1970 | 1–2 | 33.3% | — | 1,480 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1970 | 10–7 | 58.8% | — | 1,580 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 22 | 1971 | 12–8 | 60.0% | — | 1,684 | 0 | 1 | 1972 | 0–5 | 0.0% | — | 1,416 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 1972 | 7–14 | 33.3% | — | 1,645 | 0 | 1 | 1973 | 5–6 | 45.5% | — | 1,453 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 1973 | 13–23 | 36.1% | — | 1,643 | 0 | 1 | 1974 | 2–2 | 50.0% | — | 1,472 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 1974 | 15–17 | 46.9% | — | 1,718 | 0 | 1 | 1975 | 13–9 | 59.1% | — | 1,661 | 0 | 2 |
| 26 | 1975 | 23–22 | 51.1% | — | 1,765 | 0 | 2 | 1976 | 15–19 | 44.1% | — | 1,650 | 0 | 2 |
| 27 | 1976 | 25–19 | 56.8% | — | 1,819 | 0 | 3 | 1977 | 11–15 | 42.3% | — | 1,618 | 0 | 2 |
| 28 | 1977 | 28–22 | 56.0% | — | 1,837 | 0 | 5 | 1978 | 14–15 | 48.3% | — | 1,613 | 0 | 2 |
| 29 | 1978 | 24–25 | 49.0% | — | 1,731 | 0 | 5 | 1979 | 4–6 | 40.0% | — | 1,599 | 0 | 2 |
| 30 | 1979 | 22–20 | 52.4% | — | 1,825 | 0 | 6 | 1980 | 27–17 | 61.4% | — | 1,675 | 0 | 3 |
| 31 | 1980 | 16–23 | 41.0% | — | 1,719 | 0 | 6 | 1981 | 7–12 | 36.8% | — | 1,624 | 0 | 3 |
| 32 | 1981 | 7–16 | 30.4% | — | 1,638 | 0 | 6 | 1982 | 10–12 | 45.5% | — | 1,546 | 0 | 3 |
| 33 | 1982 | 6–12 | 33.3% | — | 1,594 | 0 | 6 | 1983 | 1–2 | 33.3% | — | 1,551 | 0 | 3 |
| 34 | 1983 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,592 | 0 | 6 | 1984 | 2–4 | 33.3% | — | 1,534 | 0 | 3 |