H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Margaret Court vs Gail Sherriff H2H: 4-1
Margaret Court holds a 4–1 lead over Gail Sherriff in their WTA head-to-head. Across 5 main-draw meetings, Margaret Court leads 3–0 on grass, while they are tied 1–1 on clay. Most recently, Gail Sherriff won the 1971 Roland Garros fourth round 6-3 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 84
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H
4
–
1
5 main draw meetings
FRA
Age 81
Right-Handed
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 29, 1971* | Roland Garros | Grand Slam | R16 | Clay | Gail Sherriff | 6-3 6-4 | Margaret Court | Match data |
| May 15, 1971* | Fulham | WTA 250 | SF | Clay | Margaret Court | 6-1 6-1 | Gail Sherriff | Match data |
| Jan 16, 1971* | Sydney | WTA 500 | SF | Grass | Margaret Court | 6-4 7-5 | Gail Sherriff | Match data |
| Jan 4, 1971* | Perth | WTA 250 | SF | Grass | Margaret Court | 6-2 6-3 | Gail Sherriff | Match data |
| Aug 23, 1970* | Haverford | WTA 250 | QF | Grass | Margaret Court | 6-1 6-2 | Gail Sherriff | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Margaret Court | — | — | — | 2,487 | 616 | 64 | 90.6% | 11 | 2 | 0 | 4 | 78 | 95 |
| Gail Sherriff | — | — | — | 1,978 | 342 | 145 | 70.2% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 41 | 41 |
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 | Margaret Court | Gail Sherriff | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 23 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1968 | 65–14 | 82.3% | — | 1,847 | 0 | 13 |
| 24 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1969 | 45–22 | 67.2% | — | 1,800 | 0 | 17 |
| 25 | 1968 | 103–12 | 89.6% | — | 2,042 | 0 | 15 | 1970 | 52–19 | 73.2% | — | 1,933 | 0 | 21 |
| 26 | 1969 | 103–6 | 94.5% | — | 2,236 | 3 | 34 | 1971 | 49–20 | 71.0% | — | 1,921 | 0 | 23 |
| 27 | 1970 | 114–6 | 95.0% | — | 2,350 | 7 | 56 | 1972 | 35–13 | 72.9% | — | 1,860 | 0 | 28 |
| 28 | 1971 | 59–4 | 93.7% | — | 2,374 | 8 | 65 | 1973 | 3–7 | 30.0% | — | 1,758 | 0 | 28 |
| 29 | 1972 | 57–6 | 90.5% | — | 2,400 | 8 | 74 | 1974 | 30–10 | 75.0% | — | 1,877 | 0 | 34 |
| 30 | 1973 | 105–7 | 93.8% | — | 2,432 | 11 | 92 | 1975 | 17–10 | 63.0% | — | 1,833 | 0 | 38 |
| 31 | 1974 | 12–2 | 85.7% | — | 2,409 | 11 | 93 | 1976 | 18–10 | 64.3% | — | 1,793 | 0 | 38 |
| 32 | 1975 | 40–13 | 75.5% | — | 2,250 | 11 | 94 | 1977 | 0–3 | 0.0% | — | 1,755 | 0 | 38 |
| 33 | 1976 | 7–1 | 87.5% | — | 2,262 | 11 | 95 | 1978 | 15–6 | 71.4% | — | 1,772 | 0 | 39 |
| 34 | 1977 | 16–7 | 69.6% | — | 2,200 | 11 | 95 | 1979 | 1–4 | 20.0% | — | 1,721 | 0 | 39 |
| 35 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1980 | 9–5 | 64.3% | — | 1,704 | 0 | 40 |
| 36 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1981 | 3–1 | 75.0% | — | 1,711 | 0 | 41 |
| 37 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1982 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,701 | 0 | 41 |