H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 08:25 UTC
Liz Smylie vs Laura Arraya H2H: 2-2
Liz Smylie and Laura Arraya are tied 2–2 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 4 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on hard courts, while Laura Arraya leads 1–0 on carpet. Most recently, Laura Arraya won the 1993 Osaka quarterfinal 4-6 6-1 6-4.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
AUS
Age 63
Right-Handed
166 cm / 5'5"
H2H
2
–
2
4 main draw meetings
PER
Age 62
Right-Handed
173 cm / 5'8"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 14, 1993* | Osaka | WTA 250 | QF | Carpet | Laura Arraya | 4-6 6-1 6-4 | Liz Smylie | Match data |
| Jan 18, 1991* | Australian Open | Grand Slam | R64 | Hard | Liz Smylie | 6-3 2-6 9-7 | Laura Arraya | Match data |
| Jul 19, 1990* | Newport | WTA 250 | R32 | Grass | Liz Smylie | 2-6 7-6 6-3 | Laura Arraya | Match data |
| Oct 14, 1982* | Tokyo Borden | WTA 250 | R32 | Hard | Laura Arraya | 6-3 6-4 | Liz Smylie | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Liz Smylie | #501 | #20 | 29 | 1,824 | 161 | 188 | 46.1% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 5 |
| 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 | Liz Smylie | Laura Arraya | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 1980 | 11–4 | 73.3% | — | 1,641 | 0 | 1 | 1981 | 19–8 | 70.4% | — | 1,683 | 0 | 4 |
| 18 | 1981 | 2–10 | 16.7% | — | 1,528 | 0 | 1 | 1982 | 33–17 | 66.0% | — | 1,741 | 0 | 7 |
| 19 | 1982 | 15–8 | 65.2% | — | 1,634 | 0 | 3 | 1983 | 23–23 | 50.0% | — | 1,713 | 0 | 7 |
| 20 | 1983 | 20–14 | 58.8% | — | 1,758 | 0 | 4 | 1984 | 29–18 | 61.7% | #34 | 1,760 | 0 | 8 |
| 21 | 1984 | 13–18 | 41.9% | #36 | 1,766 | 0 | 4 | 1985 | 17–21 | 44.7% | #63 | 1,693 | 0 | 8 |
| 22 | 1985 | 16–19 | 45.7% | #43 | 1,730 | 0 | 4 | 1986 | 23–24 | 48.9% | #33 | 1,718 | 0 | 8 |
| 23 | 1986 | 6–13 | 31.6% | #114 | 1,669 | 0 | 4 | 1987 | 16–14 | 53.3% | #45 | 1,770 | 0 | 8 |
| 24 | 1987 | 20–14 | 58.8% | #27 | 1,747 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 25 | 1988 | 4–11 | 26.7% | #153 | 1,597 | 0 | 5 | 1989 | 27–12 | 69.2% | #19 | 1,882 | 0 | 10 |
| 26 | 1989 | 21–22 | 48.8% | #66 | 1,679 | 0 | 5 | 1990 | 26–19 | 57.8% | #21 | 1,821 | 0 | 10 |
| 27 | 1990 | 15–16 | 48.4% | #53 | 1,664 | 0 | 5 | 1991 | 28–17 | 62.2% | #24 | 1,823 | 0 | 10 |
| 28 | 1991 | 9–16 | 36.0% | #116 | 1,612 | 0 | 5 | 1992 | 20–19 | 51.3% | #45 | 1,734 | 0 | 10 |
| 29 | 1992 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #209 | 1,599 | 0 | 5 | 1993 | 9–12 | 42.9% | #71 | 1,683 | 0 | 10 |
| 30 | 1993 | 7–15 | 31.8% | #125 | 1,550 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 1994 | 2–7 | 22.2% | #192 | 1,515 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |