H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Madison Brengle vs Dinah Pfizenmaier H2H: 0-1
Dinah Pfizenmaier holds a 1–0 lead over Madison Brengle in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Dinah Pfizenmaier leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Dinah Pfizenmaier won the 2015 Rio de Janeiro fourth round 7-5 0-6 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.
USA
Age 36
Right-Handed
168 cm / 5'6"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
GER
Age 34
Right-Handed
171 cm / 5'7"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 20, 2015* | Rio de Janeiro | WTA 250 | R16 | Clay | Dinah Pfizenmaier | 7-5 0-6 7-5 | Madison Brengle | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Madison Brengle | #210 | #35 | 1,324 | 1,740 | 94 | 151 | 38.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Dinah Pfizenmaier | #865 | #79 | 746 | 1,567 | 14 | 21 | 40.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
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 | Madison Brengle | Dinah Pfizenmaier | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 2007 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #229 | 1,502 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 2008 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #220 | 1,457 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 2009 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #165 | 1,456 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 2010 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #188 | 1,447 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #141 | 1,503 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2011 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #197 | 1,459 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #95 | 1,534 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2012 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #191 | 1,444 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 6–10 | 37.5% | #142 | 1,527 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2015 | 3–3 | 50.0% | #267 | 1,539 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2014 | 4–4 | 50.0% | #95 | 1,503 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 25 | 2015 | 25–26 | 49.0% | #40 | 1,627 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 26 | 2016 | 16–22 | 42.1% | #73 | 1,602 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 27 | 2017 | 10–18 | 35.7% | #83 | 1,656 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 2018 | 3–11 | 21.4% | #88 | 1,606 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 2019 | 7–11 | 38.9% | #95 | 1,601 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 2020 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #82 | 1,641 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 2021 | 6–14 | 30.0% | #59 | 1,645 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 2022 | 12–16 | 42.9% | #57 | 1,637 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 2023 | 6–14 | 30.0% | #151 | 1,586 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |