H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Laurence Courtois vs Maria Strandlund Tomsvik H2H: 1-1
Laurence Courtois and Maria Strandlund Tomsvik are tied 1–1 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Laurence Courtois leads 1–0 on grass, while Maria Strandlund Tomsvik leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Laurence Courtois won the 1996 Birmingham third round 6-2 6-2.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
BEL
Age 50
Right-Handed
172 cm / 5'8"
H2H
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 13, 1996* | Birmingham | WTA 250 | R32 | Grass | Laurence Courtois | 6-2 6-2 | Maria Strandlund Tomsvik | Match data |
| Jan 4, 1995* | Jakarta | WTA 250 | R64 | Hard | Maria Strandlund Tomsvik | 6-2 7-6 | Laurence Courtois | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Laurence Courtois | #484 | #37 | 565 | 1,719 | 74 | 93 | 44.3% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Maria Strandlund Tomsvik | — | — | — | 1,626 | 42 | 77 | 35.3% | 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.
| Laurence Courtois | Maria Strandlund Tomsvik | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles |
| 1993 | 3–3 | 50.0% | #104 | 1,520 | 0 | 0 | 1987 | 1–1 | 50.0% | — | 1,504 | 0 | 0 |
| 1994 | 8–13 | 38.1% | #105 | 1,545 | 0 | 0 | 1988 | 6–7 | 46.2% | — | 1,577 | 0 | 0 |
| 1995 | 14–14 | 50.0% | #64 | 1,625 | 0 | 0 | 1989 | 10–14 | 41.7% | — | 1,612 | 0 | 0 |
| 1996 | 19–15 | 55.9% | #44 | 1,706 | 0 | 0 | 1990 | 7–16 | 30.4% | — | 1,589 | 0 | 0 |
| 1997 | 4–9 | 30.8% | #183 | 1,639 | 0 | 0 | 1991 | 6–12 | 33.3% | — | 1,554 | 0 | 0 |
| 1998 | 4–9 | 30.8% | #125 | 1,574 | 0 | 0 | 1992 | 0–3 | 0.0% | — | 1,520 | 0 | 0 |
| 1999 | 13–17 | 43.3% | #78 | 1,545 | 0 | 0 | 1993 | 2–3 | 40.0% | — | 1,560 | 0 | 0 |
| 2000 | 6–10 | 37.5% | #130 | 1,539 | 0 | 0 | 1994 | 0–2 | 0.0% | — | 1,547 | 0 | 0 |
| 2001 | 3–3 | 50.0% | #166 | 1,540 | 0 | 0 | 1995 | 8–13 | 38.1% | — | 1,545 | 0 | 0 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1996 | 2–5 | 28.6% | — | 1,527 | 0 | 0 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1997 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,516 | 0 | 0 |