H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 17:48 UTC
Lele Forood vs Laura Arraya H2H: 2-0
Lele Forood holds a 2–0 lead over Laura Arraya in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Lele Forood leads 1–0 on clay and 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Lele Forood won the 1982 Deerfield Beach third round 6-3 4-6 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.
Age 69
H2H
2
–
0
2 main draw meetings
PER
Age 62
Right-Handed
173 cm / 5'8"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 7, 1982* | Deerfield Beach | WTA 250 | R32 | Hard | Lele Forood | 6-3 4-6 6-2 | Laura Arraya | Match data |
| May 26, 1982* | Roland Garros | Grand Slam | R128 | Clay | Lele Forood | 6-4 1-6 6-3 | Laura Arraya | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lele Forood | — | — | — | 1,684 | 54 | 96 | 36.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Laura Arraya | #192 | #14 | 51 | 1,922 | 270 | 204 | 57.0% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 9 | 10 |
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 | Lele Forood | Laura Arraya | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 14 | 1971 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,481 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 16 | 1973 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,477 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 1974 | 3–1 | 75.0% | — | 1,514 | 0 | 0 | 1981 | 19–8 | 70.4% | — | 1,683 | 0 | 4 |
| 18 | 1975 | 4–0 | 100.0% | — | 1,573 | 0 | 1 | 1982 | 33–17 | 66.0% | — | 1,741 | 0 | 7 |
| 19 | 1976 | 1–1 | 50.0% | — | 1,575 | 0 | 1 | 1983 | 23–23 | 50.0% | — | 1,713 | 0 | 7 |
| 20 | 1977 | 4–11 | 26.7% | — | 1,552 | 0 | 1 | 1984 | 29–18 | 61.7% | #34 | 1,760 | 0 | 8 |
| 21 | 1978 | 4–9 | 30.8% | — | 1,612 | 0 | 1 | 1985 | 17–21 | 44.7% | #63 | 1,693 | 0 | 8 |
| 22 | 1979 | 9–19 | 32.1% | — | 1,634 | 0 | 1 | 1986 | 23–24 | 48.9% | #33 | 1,718 | 0 | 8 |
| 23 | 1980 | 11–15 | 42.3% | — | 1,638 | 0 | 1 | 1987 | 16–14 | 53.3% | #45 | 1,770 | 0 | 8 |
| 24 | 1981 | 4–10 | 28.6% | — | 1,592 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 25 | 1982 | 5–9 | 35.7% | — | 1,567 | 0 | 1 | 1989 | 27–12 | 69.2% | #19 | 1,882 | 0 | 10 |
| 26 | 1983 | 8–16 | 33.3% | — | 1,555 | 0 | 1 | 1990 | 26–19 | 57.8% | #21 | 1,821 | 0 | 10 |
| 27 | 1984 | 1–3 | 25.0% | — | 1,526 | 0 | 1 | 1991 | 28–17 | 62.2% | #24 | 1,823 | 0 | 10 |
| 28 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1992 | 20–19 | 51.3% | #45 | 1,734 | 0 | 10 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1993 | 9–12 | 42.9% | #71 | 1,683 | 0 | 10 |