H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 16:32 UTC
Laura Siegemund vs Nicole Gibbs H2H: 1-0
Laura Siegemund holds a 1–0 lead over Nicole Gibbs in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Laura Siegemund leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Laura Siegemund won the 2016 US Open second round 6-3 7-5.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
GER
Age 38
Right-Handed
168 cm / 5'6"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
USA
Age 33
Right-Handed
168 cm / 5'6"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 1, 2016* | US Open | Grand Slam | R64 | Hard | Laura Siegemund | 6-3 7-5 | Nicole Gibbs | 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 Siegemund | #87 | #27 | 1,630 | 1,828 | 143 | 152 | 48.5% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| Nicole Gibbs | #175 | #68 | 946 | 1,692 | 37 | 60 | 38.1% | 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 | Laura Siegemund | Nicole Gibbs | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2012 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #222 | 1,504 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2013 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #185 | 1,509 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2014 | 5–6 | 45.5% | #96 | 1,549 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2010 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #220 | 1,483 | 0 | 0 | 2015 | 4–11 | 26.7% | #109 | 1,505 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2016 | 13–15 | 46.4% | #89 | 1,590 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2017 | 7–12 | 36.8% | #109 | 1,580 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2018 | 1–6 | 14.3% | #123 | 1,529 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2014 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #136 | 1,495 | 0 | 0 | 2019 | 4–3 | 57.1% | #126 | 1,628 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2015 | 5–7 | 41.7% | #98 | 1,529 | 0 | 0 | 2020 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #172 | 1,606 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2016 | 27–17 | 61.4% | #31 | 1,735 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 2017 | 14–12 | 53.8% | #69 | 1,792 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 2018 | 8–11 | 42.1% | #113 | 1,691 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 2019 | 15–20 | 42.9% | #75 | 1,666 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 2020 | 11–9 | 55.0% | #51 | 1,762 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 2021 | 8–13 | 38.1% | #125 | 1,727 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 34 | 2022 | 3–7 | 30.0% | #177 | 1,652 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 35 | 2023 | 13–11 | 54.2% | #86 | 1,784 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 36 | 2024 | 17–16 | 51.5% | #80 | 1,738 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 37 | 2025 | 13–14 | 48.1% | #46 | 1,803 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 38 | 2026 | 8–12 | 40.0% | #87 | 1,748 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |