H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Louise Field vs Patricia Hy Boulais H2H: 0-1
Patricia Hy Boulais holds a 1–0 lead over Louise Field in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Patricia Hy Boulais leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Patricia Hy Boulais won the 1990 Singapore fourth round 3-6 6-3 7-5.
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 59
Right-Handed
198 cm / 6'6"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
Age 60
163 cm / 5'4"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 27, 1990* | Singapore | WTA 500 | R16 | Hard | Patricia Hy Boulais | 3-6 6-3 7-5 | Louise Field | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Louise Field | #752 | #96 | 12 | 1,579 | 58 | 121 | 32.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Patricia Hy Boulais | — | — | — | 1,907 | 140 | 163 | 46.2% | 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 | Louise Field | Patricia Hy Boulais | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 15 | 1982 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,488 | 0 | 0 | 1981 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,493 | 0 | 0 |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1982 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,477 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 1984 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #248 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 | 1983 | 7–8 | 46.7% | — | 1,546 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 1985 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #106 | 1,518 | 0 | 0 | 1984 | 0–2 | 0.0% | — | 1,522 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1986 | 4–10 | 28.6% | #157 | 1,479 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 1987 | 11–17 | 39.3% | #113 | 1,470 | 0 | 0 | 1986 | 8–1 | 88.9% | — | 1,633 | 0 | 1 |
| 21 | 1988 | 4–13 | 23.5% | #163 | 1,421 | 0 | 0 | 1987 | 9–15 | 37.5% | — | 1,594 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 1989 | 12–20 | 37.5% | #100 | 1,545 | 0 | 0 | 1988 | 0–5 | 0.0% | — | 1,530 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 1990 | 9–17 | 34.6% | #125 | 1,523 | 0 | 0 | 1989 | 1–4 | 20.0% | — | 1,500 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 1991 | 3–14 | 17.6% | #193 | 1,436 | 0 | 0 | 1990 | 7–7 | 50.0% | — | 1,565 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 1992 | 5–9 | 35.7% | #170 | 1,450 | 0 | 0 | 1991 | 18–17 | 51.4% | — | 1,702 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 1993 | 5–10 | 33.3% | #175 | 1,471 | 0 | 0 | 1992 | 21–15 | 58.3% | — | 1,878 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 1994 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #197 | 1,477 | 0 | 0 | 1993 | 21–15 | 58.3% | — | 1,852 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1994 | 15–16 | 48.4% | — | 1,756 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1995 | 11–14 | 44.0% | — | 1,691 | 0 | 1 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1996 | 9–15 | 37.5% | — | 1,678 | 0 | 1 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1997 | 12–19 | 38.7% | — | 1,660 | 0 | 1 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1998 | 1–8 | 11.1% | — | 1,571 | 0 | 1 |