H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Lesley Turner vs Mary Ann Eisel H2H: 1-3
Mary Ann Eisel holds a 3–1 lead over Lesley Turner in their WTA head-to-head. Across 4 main-draw meetings, Mary Ann Eisel leads 2–0 on clay, while they are tied 1–1 on grass. Most recently, Mary Ann Eisel won the 1971 Bournemouth fourth round 6-3 9-8(4).
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 21, 1971* | Bournemouth | WTA 250 | R16 | Clay | Mary Ann Eisel | 6-3 9-8(4) | Lesley Turner | Match data |
| May 13, 1971* | Fulham | WTA 250 | R32 | Clay | Mary Ann Eisel | 6-3 4-6 6-1 | Lesley Turner | Match data |
| Aug 20, 1969* | Chestnut Hill | WTA 250 | R16 | Grass | Mary Ann Eisel | 6-2 6-3 | Lesley Turner | Match data |
| Jun 29, 1969* | Wimbledon | Grand Slam | R32 | Grass | Lesley Turner | 8-10 6-4 6-2 | Mary Ann Eisel | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lesley Turner | — | — | — | 1,912 | 144 | 76 | 65.5% | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 10 |
| Mary Ann Eisel | — | — | — | 1,945 | 172 | 95 | 64.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 12 | 12 |
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 | Lesley Turner | Mary Ann Eisel | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 21 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1968 | 45–22 | 67.2% | — | 1,774 | 0 | 3 |
| 22 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1969 | 54–23 | 70.1% | — | 1,800 | 0 | 7 |
| 23 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1970 | 33–20 | 62.3% | — | 1,769 | 0 | 11 |
| 24 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1971 | 26–19 | 57.8% | — | 1,862 | 0 | 11 |
| 25 | 1968 | 48–22 | 68.6% | — | 1,724 | 0 | 4 | 1972 | 3–6 | 33.3% | — | 1,825 | 0 | 11 |
| 26 | 1969 | 55–22 | 71.4% | — | 1,873 | 0 | 7 | 1973 | 2–1 | 66.7% | — | 1,837 | 0 | 11 |
| 27 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1974 | 7–2 | 77.8% | — | 1,860 | 0 | 12 |
| 28 | 1971 | 20–12 | 62.5% | — | 1,864 | 0 | 9 | 1975 | 1–1 | 50.0% | — | 1,852 | 0 | 12 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1976 | 1–1 | 50.0% | — | 1,840 | 0 | 12 |
| 30 | 1973 | 6–4 | 60.0% | — | 1,853 | 0 | 9 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 1974 | 3–3 | 50.0% | — | 1,825 | 0 | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 1975 | 4–3 | 57.1% | — | 1,810 | 0 | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 1976 | 5–4 | 55.6% | — | 1,799 | 0 | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 34 | 1977 | 1–3 | 25.0% | — | 1,770 | 0 | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 35 | 1978 | 2–3 | 40.0% | — | 1,772 | 0 | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |