H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 16:32 UTC
Laura Siegemund vs Patricia Maria Tig H2H: 3-1
Laura Siegemund holds a 3–1 lead over Patricia Maria Tig in their WTA head-to-head. Across 4 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on clay, while Laura Siegemund leads 2–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Laura Siegemund won the 2019 Hiroshima fourth round 6-2 5-7 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
3
–
1
4 main draw meetings
ROU
Age 31
Right-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 13, 2019* | Hiroshima | WTA 250 | R16 | Hard | Laura Siegemund | 6-2 5-7 7-5 | Patricia Maria Tig | Match data |
| Jul 20, 2019* | Bucharest | WTA 250 | SF | Clay | Patricia Maria Tig | 6-3 6-1 | Laura Siegemund | Match data |
| Aug 31, 2016* | US Open | Grand Slam | R128 | Hard | Laura Siegemund | 3-6 6-3 6-2 | Patricia Maria Tig | Match data |
| Apr 6, 2016* | Charleston | WTA 500 | R64 | Clay | Laura Siegemund | 4-6 6-3 6-3 | Patricia Maria Tig | 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 |
| Patricia Maria Tig | #417 | #56 | 1,284 | 1,739 | 40 | 52 | 43.5% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 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 | Laura Siegemund | Patricia Maria Tig | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 20 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2015 | 5–4 | 55.6% | #123 | 1,532 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2016 | 8–12 | 40.0% | #108 | 1,520 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2010 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #220 | 1,483 | 0 | 0 | 2017 | 2–9 | 18.2% | #232 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2019 | 8–4 | 66.7% | #114 | 1,652 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2020 | 11–5 | 68.8% | #56 | 1,724 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2014 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #136 | 1,495 | 0 | 0 | 2021 | 3–9 | 25.0% | #225 | 1,623 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2015 | 5–7 | 41.7% | #98 | 1,529 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 2016 | 27–17 | 61.4% | #31 | 1,735 | 0 | 1 | 2023 | 2–7 | 22.2% | #436 | 1,535 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 2017 | 14–12 | 53.8% | #69 | 1,792 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 2018 | 8–11 | 42.1% | #113 | 1,691 | 0 | 2 | 2025 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #400 | 1,470 | 0 | 1 |
| 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 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |