H2H data updated: 2026-09-13 00:00 UTC

Lori Mcneil vs Nathalie Herreman H2H: 0-1

Nathalie Herreman holds a 1–0 lead over Lori Mcneil in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Nathalie Herreman leads 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Nathalie Herreman won the 1990 Wimbledon round of 32 6-4 6-3.

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

Lori Mcneil
USA Age 62 Right-Handed 170 cm / 5'7"
H2H
0 – 1
1 main-draw meetings
Nathalie Herreman
FRA Age 60 Left-Handed 164 cm / 5'5"

H2H Match Log

PlayerScorePlayerMatch DataDateRoundTournamentCategorySurface
Nathalie Herreman #72 6-4 6-3 Lori Mcneil #40 Match data Jul 1, 1990* R32 Wimbledon Grand Slam Grass

Estimated match date where the exact historical date is unavailable. Arrows show an edition's recorded category and documented modern equivalent; unresolved editions keep their recorded category. Asterisked totals include editions mapped from documented historical predecessor categories. Mapping details.

Career Comparison

Player Current Peak Pts Elo W L Win % GS 1000 including documented historical predecessor categories Finals 500 including documented historical predecessor categories 250 including documented historical predecessor categories Titles
Lori Mcneil #867 #9 303 2,024 377 273 58.0% 0 0 0 1 10 11
Nathalie Herreman #886 #42 20 1,727 103 154 40.1% 0 0 0 0 1 1

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 Lori Mcneil Nathalie Herreman
YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles
16 1980 0–1 0.0% — 1,484 0 0 1982 0–1 0.0% — 1,492 0 0
17 1981 2–0 100.0% — 1,520 0 1 1983 4–3 57.1% — 1,547 0 0
18 1982 1–2 33.3% — 1,503 0 1 1984 8–12 40.0% #125 1,563 0 0
19 1983 6–5 54.5% — 1,568 0 1 1985 3–6 33.3% #126 1,542 0 0
20 1984 7–11 38.9% #97 1,608 0 1 1986 16–11 59.3% #42 1,717 0 1
21 1985 13–23 36.1% #93 1,587 0 1 1987 11–20 35.5% #91 1,640 0 1
22 1986 42–22 65.6% #14 1,884 0 3 1988 8–12 40.0% #95 1,605 0 1
23 1987 54–24 69.2% #11 2,007 0 3 1989 8–17 32.0% #134 1,568 0 1
24 1988 46–20 69.7% #13 1,901 0 5 1990 19–20 48.7% #62 1,683 0 1
25 1989 24–22 52.2% #36 1,760 0 6 1991 12–21 36.4% #121 1,618 0 1
26 1990 17–20 45.9% #52 1,695 0 6 1992 6–16 27.3% #183 1,556 0 1
27 1991 39–21 65.0% #19 1,870 0 8 1993 7–9 43.8% #107 1,623 0 1
28 1992 37–20 64.9% #15 1,962 0 9 1994 1–5 16.7% #181 1,584 0 1
29 1993 27–19 58.7% #25 1,898 0 10 1995 0–1 0.0% #386 1,580 0 1
30 1994 26–15 63.4% #17 1,871 0 11 — — — — — — —
31 1995 19–19 50.0% #34 1,804 0 11 — — — — — — —
32 1996 8–14 36.4% #83 1,727 0 11 — — — — — — —
33 1997 1–7 12.5% #301 1,656 0 11 — — — — — — —
34 1998 8–6 57.1% #91 1,718 0 11 — — — — — — —
35 1999 0–2 0.0% #869 1,670 0 11 — — — — — — —

Surface Results by Age

Seasons are aligned by the age each player spent most of that calendar year. Results cover completed main-draw matches. Bold green marks the higher win percentage when both players have at least 5 matches on that surface at the aligned age.

Age Lori Mcneil Nathalie Herreman
Yr HardClayGrassCarpet Yr HardClayGrassCarpet
W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win %
16 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1982 — — — — — — — — 0 1 1 0.0% — — — —
17 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1983 — — — — 2 1 3 66.7% 1 1 2 50.0% 1 1 2 50.0%
18 1982 1 1 2 50.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — 1984 4 4 8 50.0% 3 5 8 37.5% 0 1 1 0.0% 1 2 3 33.3%
19 1983 5 3 8 62.5% — — — — 1 1 2 50.0% 0 1 1 0.0% 1985 — — — — 2 5 7 28.6% — — — — 1 1 2 50.0%
20 1984 3 2 5 60.0% 1 3 4 25.0% 3 5 8 37.5% 0 1 1 0.0% 1986 1 3 4 25.0% 9 4 13 69.2% 1 1 2 50.0% 5 3 8 62.5%
21 1985 5 7 12 41.7% 3 7 10 30.0% 2 5 7 28.6% 3 4 7 42.9% 1987 5 6 11 45.5% 5 9 14 35.7% 0 2 2 0.0% 1 3 4 25.0%
22 1986 20 7 27 74.1% 4 5 9 44.4% 10 4 14 71.4% 8 6 14 57.1% 1988 4 4 8 50.0% 1 5 6 16.7% 2 2 4 50.0% 1 1 2 50.0%
23 1987 19 6 25 76.0% 7 4 11 63.6% 9 6 15 60.0% 19 8 27 70.4% 1989 6 7 13 46.2% 1 6 7 14.3% 0 2 2 0.0% 1 2 3 33.3%
24 1988 22 10 32 68.8% 8 4 12 66.7% 12 3 15 80.0% 4 3 7 57.1% 1990 11 10 21 52.4% 4 5 9 44.4% 3 2 5 60.0% 1 3 4 25.0%
25 1989 10 8 18 55.6% 4 5 9 44.4% 4 4 8 50.0% 6 5 11 54.5% 1991 4 11 15 26.7% 3 5 8 37.5% 1 2 3 33.3% 4 3 7 57.1%
26 1990 8 11 19 42.1% 0 3 3 0.0% 8 3 11 72.7% 1 3 4 25.0% 1992 1 4 5 20.0% 1 5 6 16.7% 0 2 2 0.0% 4 5 9 44.4%
27 1991 24 10 34 70.6% 1 2 3 33.3% 6 3 9 66.7% 8 6 14 57.1% 1993 5 7 12 41.7% 2 2 4 50.0% — — — — — — — —
28 1992 13 9 22 59.1% 3 3 6 50.0% 10 2 12 83.3% 11 6 17 64.7% 1994 0 3 3 0.0% 1 2 3 33.3% — — — — — — — —
29 1993 11 8 19 57.9% 2 5 7 28.6% 10 2 12 83.3% 4 4 8 50.0% 1995 — — — — 0 1 1 0.0% — — — — — — — —
30 1994 6 6 12 50.0% 4 3 7 57.1% 11 2 13 84.6% 5 4 9 55.6% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
31 1995 4 7 11 36.4% 1 4 5 20.0% 7 3 10 70.0% 7 5 12 58.3% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
32 1996 3 6 9 33.3% 0 1 1 0.0% 4 3 7 57.1% 1 4 5 20.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
33 1997 1 4 5 20.0% 0 1 1 0.0% 0 2 2 0.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
34 1998 5 3 8 62.5% 1 2 3 33.3% 2 1 3 66.7% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
35 1999 0 2 2 0.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Career — 160 110 270 59.3% 39 52 91 42.9% 99 49 148 66.9% 77 60 137 56.2% — 41 59 100 41.0% 34 55 89 38.2% 8 16 24 33.3% 20 24 44 45.5%

Advanced Statistics Comparison by Age

Seasons are aligned by the age each player spent most of that calendar year. Metrics use eligible main-draw results; point statistics use matches with detailed data. Bold green marks the stronger value when both underlying samples are sufficient. Lower is better for Schedule because a negative value means a tougher schedule. Career Schedule is normalized per 100 matches.

Age Lori Mcneil Nathalie Herreman
Yr Elo P+ Serve+ Return+ PD TPW% Hard Elo Clay Elo Grass Elo Set Win % Set Margin Dec. Set Tiebreak Pressure+ Schedule Yr Elo P+ Serve+ Return+ PD TPW% Hard Elo Clay Elo Grass Elo Set Win % Set Margin Dec. Set Tiebreak Pressure+ Schedule
16 1980 1485 95.1 — — — — — — — 0.0% -4.50 — — — +0.17 1982 1492 99.9 — — — — — — — 0.0% -2.00 — — — -0.01
17 1981 1521 104.9 — — — — — — — 100.0% +4.50 — — — +0.24 1983 1548 103.2 — — — — — +61 — 50.0% -0.31 2–0 1–0 — +0.65
18 1982 1503 100.0 — — — — — — — 42.9% -0.14 0–1 0–1 — +0.35 1984 1564 106.0 — — — — +9 +37 — 41.9% -0.81 1–2 (33%) 1–2 (33%) 97.3 +1.16
19 1983 1569 107.1 — — — — +44 — — 53.8% +0.19 2–2 (50%) 0–1 — +1.06 1985 1543 100.6 — — — — — -28 — 40.0% -1.30 0–2 — — +0.91
20 1984 1608 115.2 — — — — +12 -54 +10 38.1% -0.81 4–2 (67%) 1–1 — +0.27 1986 1718 137.8 — — — — -77 -14 — 62.1% +0.93 2–4 (33%) 2–3 (40%) 100.4 +1.39
21 1985 1587 118.3 — — — — +22 -103 +5 39.2% -0.85 2–5 (29%) 3–5 (38%) 96.4 -0.20 1987 1641 121.1 — — — — -12 -7 — 40.8% -0.90 2–7 (22%) 5–2 (71%) 95.4 +0.60
22 1986 1884 144.9 — — — — -9 -341 -107 60.5% +0.68 16–10 (62%) 12–9 (57%) 109.2 +1.49 1988 1606 116.4 — — — — +37 -63 -63 46.2% -0.48 4–8 (33%) 0–1 — +0.90
23 1987 2007 158.4 — — — — +54 -355 -205 63.8% +0.91 16–9 (64%) 12–1 (92%) 109.8 -0.78 1989 1568 127.3 — — — — +91 -64 — 36.4% -0.73 1–4 (20%) 0–6 (0%) 92.4 -0.56
24 1988 1901 142.6 — — — — +37 -185 +39 62.9% +0.76 19–10 (66%) 8–5 (62%) 105.0 +2.06 1990 1683 140.3 — — — — +41 -156 -113 48.3% -0.24 5–4 (56%) 2–2 (50%) 103.4 -1.70
25 1989 1760 134.7 — — — — +60 -78 +79 52.0% +0.07 5–7 (42%) 5–6 (45%) 96.3 -0.23 1991 1618 118.4 — — — — +27 -109 -32 38.7% -0.83 4–5 (44%) 3–2 (60%) 100.4 -0.07
26 1990 1695 134.9 — — — — +14 -74 +200 48.2% -0.08 4–9 (31%) 5–6 (45%) 90.4 -0.80 1992 1556 118.1 — — — — +62 -82 — 34.7% -1.06 0–5 (0%) 0–1 — -0.27
27 1991 1870 151.0 — — — — +12 -241 +42 60.4% +0.77 13–6 (68%) 9–10 (47%) 104.2 -0.74 1993 1623 124.9 — — — — +8 -99 — 41.2% -1.18 2–0 1–0 — -0.45
28 1992 1962 156.8 — — — — -4 -303 +76 63.6% +0.94 8–10 (44%) 10–9 (53%) 96.7 -0.46 1994 1585 103.8 — — — — +19 -41 — 21.4% -3.00 1–1 1–0 — -0.34
29 1993 1899 147.7 — — — — -6 -291 +192 58.1% +0.61 6–7 (46%) 3–9 (25%) 95.3 -0.38 1995 1581 100.9 — — — — — — — 0.0% -3.50 — — — -0.22
30 1994 1871 145.9 — — — — -58 -207 +244 61.1% +0.69 7–8 (47%) 7–5 (58%) 98.9 -0.52 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
31 1995 1805 142.2 — — — — -13 -206 +304 53.8% +0.38 5–12 (29%) 4–8 (33%) 91.4 -0.26 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
32 1996 1727 130.2 — — — — -12 — +384 36.5% -0.65 5–3 (63%) 2–7 (22%) 96.5 -0.48 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
33 1997 1656 120.2 — — — — +31 — — 22.2% -1.61 0–2 0–1 — -1.12 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
34 1998 1719 129.4 — — — — +1 -154 +315 51.4% +0.09 5–2 (71%) 0–2 — -0.58 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
35 1999 1671 99.0 — — — — — — — 20.0% -0.80 0–1 0–1 — +0.18 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Career — 2025 149.2 — — — — +14 -212 +86 56.0% +0.41 117–106 (52%) 81–87 (48%) 98.3 -0.11 — 1727 129.0 — — — — +25 -47 -76 42.9% -0.64 24–42 (36%) 16–19 (46%) 93.0 +0.77

Career Rivalries

Each player's five most-played main-draw opponents. The current matchup is highlighted when it appears in a player's top five.