H2H data updated: 2026-07-20 02:15 UTC

Lindsay Davenport vs Kimiko Date Krumm H2H: 4-3

Lindsay Davenport holds a 4–3 lead over Kimiko Date Krumm in their WTA head-to-head. Across 7 main-draw meetings, Lindsay Davenport leads 2–1 on clay and 2–1 on hard courts. Most recently, Lindsay Davenport won the 1996 Roland Garros fourth round 3-6 6-4 8-6.

Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.

Lindsay Davenport
USA Age 50 Right-Handed 189 cm / 6'2"
H2H
4 – 3
7 main draw meetings
Kimiko Date Krumm
Age 55 Right-Handed 163 cm / 5'4"

H2H Match Log

DateTournamentCategoryRoundSurfaceWinnerScoreLoserMatch
Jun 4, 1996* Roland Garros Grand Slam R16 Clay Lindsay Davenport #12 3-6 6-4 8-6 Kimiko Date Krumm Match data
Jan 13, 1996* Sydney WTA 500 SF Hard Lindsay Davenport #12 6-2 4-6 7-5 Kimiko Date Krumm Match data
Jun 6, 1995* Roland Garros Grand Slam R16 Clay Kimiko Date Krumm 6-4 6-3 Lindsay Davenport #6 Match data
May 28, 1995* Strasbourg WTA 500 F Clay Lindsay Davenport #7 3-6 6-1 6-2 Kimiko Date Krumm Match data
Feb 6, 1995* Tokyo WTA 1000 F Carpet Kimiko Date Krumm 6-1 6-2 Lindsay Davenport #6 Match data
Jan 14, 1995* Sydney WTA 500 SF Hard Lindsay Davenport #7 6-4 4-1 (ret.) Kimiko Date Krumm Match data
Sep 26, 1993* Tokyo Nichirei WTA 250 QF Hard Kimiko Date Krumm 6-2 6-4 Lindsay Davenport #21 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
Lindsay Davenport #35 #1 6,100 2,353 704 190 78.7% 3 13 1 25 12 54
Kimiko Date Krumm — — — 2,091 241 188 56.2% 0 1 0 3 4 8

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 Lindsay Davenport Kimiko Date Krumm
YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles
15 1991 1–2 33.3% #348 1,504 0 0 — — — — — — —
16 1992 2–5 28.6% #161 1,511 0 0 — — — — — — —
17 1993 31–15 67.4% #20 1,858 0 1 — — — — — — —
18 1994 44–15 74.6% #6 2,022 0 3 1989 6–5 54.5% — 1,562 0 0
19 1995 31–14 68.9% #12 1,933 0 4 1990 10–7 58.8% — 1,664 0 0
20 1996 41–15 73.2% #9 2,013 0 6 1991 12–11 52.2% — 1,725 0 0
21 1997 57–16 78.1% #3 2,161 0 12 1992 26–13 66.7% — 1,867 0 1
22 1998 68–14 82.9% #1 2,283 1 18 1993 25–11 69.4% — 1,956 0 2
23 1999 58–11 84.1% #2 2,297 2 25 1994 32–12 72.7% — 1,987 0 4
24 2000 56–13 81.2% #2 2,228 3 29 1995 39–12 76.5% — 2,029 0 5
25 2001 64–10 86.5% #1 2,275 3 36 1996 31–13 70.5% — 2,071 0 7
26 2002 24–9 72.7% #12 2,153 3 36 — — — — — — —
27 2003 48–15 76.2% #5 2,076 3 37 — — — — — — —
28 2004 64–10 86.5% #1 2,203 3 44 — — — — — — —
29 2005 58–11 84.1% #1 2,199 3 50 — — — — — — —
30 2006 21–8 72.4% #25 2,122 3 50 — — — — — — —
31 2007 13–1 92.9% #72 2,147 3 52 — — — — — — —
32 2008 23–6 79.3% #35 2,063 3 54 — — — — — — —
37 — — — — — — — 2008 0–1 0.0% — 2,042 0 7
38 — — — — — — — 2009 6–11 35.3% — 1,841 0 8
39 — — — — — — — 2010 19–18 51.4% — 1,814 0 8
40 — — — — — — — 2011 7–24 22.6% — 1,567 0 8
41 — — — — — — — 2012 2–14 12.5% — 1,454 0 8
42 — — — — — — — 2013 12–15 44.4% — 1,575 0 8
43 — — — — — — — 2014 11–14 44.0% — 1,597 0 8
44 — — — — — — — 2015 3–6 33.3% — 1,574 0 8
46 — — — — — — — 2017 0–1 0.0% — 1,564 0 8