H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Madison Brengle vs Kurumi Nara H2H: 1-1
Madison Brengle and Kurumi Nara are tied 1–1 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Kurumi Nara leads 1–0 on grass, while Madison Brengle leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Kurumi Nara won the 2016 Wimbledon first round 6-2 6-7(5) 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.
USA
Age 36
Right-Handed
168 cm / 5'6"
H2H
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
JPN
Age 34
Right-Handed
155 cm / 5'1"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 7, 2018 | Hobart | WTA 250 | Q2 | Hard | Kurumi Nara | 6-3 6-4 | Madison Brengle | Match data |
| Jun 29, 2016* | Wimbledon | Grand Slam | R128 | Grass | Kurumi Nara | 6-2 6-7(5) 6-3 | Madison Brengle | Match data |
| Jan 17, 2015* | Hobart | WTA 250 | SF | Hard | Madison Brengle | 6-4 1-6 6-3 | Kurumi Nara | 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 |
| Kurumi Nara | #246 | #32 | 1,412 | 1,700 | 82 | 116 | 41.4% | 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 | Madison Brengle | Kurumi Nara | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 2009 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #181 | 1,512 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2008 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #220 | 1,457 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 1–7 | 12.5% | #130 | 1,474 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2009 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #165 | 1,456 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #140 | 1,456 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2010 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #188 | 1,447 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #148 | 1,437 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2011 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #197 | 1,459 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 5–6 | 45.5% | #81 | 1,506 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2012 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #191 | 1,444 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 23–21 | 52.3% | #44 | 1,649 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2015 | 19–22 | 46.3% | #81 | 1,588 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 2014 | 4–4 | 50.0% | #95 | 1,503 | 0 | 0 | 2016 | 15–18 | 45.5% | #77 | 1,595 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 2015 | 25–26 | 49.0% | #40 | 1,627 | 0 | 0 | 2017 | 10–15 | 40.0% | #102 | 1,581 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2016 | 16–22 | 42.1% | #73 | 1,602 | 0 | 0 | 2018 | 0–13 | 0.0% | #161 | 1,493 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2017 | 10–18 | 35.7% | #83 | 1,656 | 0 | 0 | 2019 | 3–3 | 50.0% | #140 | 1,569 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2018 | 3–11 | 21.4% | #88 | 1,606 | 0 | 0 | 2020 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #160 | 1,561 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 2019 | 7–11 | 38.9% | #95 | 1,601 | 0 | 0 | 2021 | 3–2 | 60.0% | #185 | 1,514 | 0 | 1 |
| 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 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |