H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 17:48 UTC
Marilyn Tesch vs Evonne Goolagong H2H: 0-3
Evonne Goolagong holds a 3–0 lead over Marilyn Tesch in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Evonne Goolagong leads 2–0 on clay and 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Evonne Goolagong won the 1973 Toronto quarterfinal 6-2 6-2.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
Age 54
H2H
0
–
3
3 main draw meetings
AUS
Age 74
Right-Handed
168 cm / 5'6"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 21, 1973 | Toronto | WTA 250 | QF | Clay | Evonne Goolagong | 6-2 6-2 | Marilyn Tesch | Match data |
| Nov 8, 1970* | Toowoomba | WTA 250 | F | Clay | Evonne Goolagong | 6-3 7-5 | Marilyn Tesch | Match data |
| Jan 25, 1968* | Australian Championships | Grand Slam | R32 | Grass | Evonne Goolagong | 6-3 6-2 | Marilyn Tesch | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Marilyn Tesch | — | — | — | 1,599 | 26 | 42 | 38.2% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Evonne Goolagong | #85 | #35 | — | 2,471 | 735 | 158 | 82.3% | 7 | 2 | 1 | 8 | 66 | 84 |
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 | Marilyn Tesch | Evonne Goolagong | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| -4 | 1968 | 1–2 | 33.3% | — | 1,493 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| -3 | 1969 | 0–2 | 0.0% | — | 1,473 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| -2 | 1970 | 3–4 | 42.9% | — | 1,502 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| -1 | 1971 | 4–11 | 26.7% | — | 1,460 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 0 | 1972 | 6–4 | 60.0% | — | 1,540 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 1 | 1973 | 11–17 | 39.3% | — | 1,563 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2 | 1974 | 1–1 | 50.0% | — | 1,566 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 5 | 1977 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,557 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1968 | 9–4 | 69.2% | — | 1,578 | 0 | 1 |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1969 | 13–8 | 61.9% | — | 1,630 | 0 | 3 |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1970 | 74–19 | 79.6% | — | 1,999 | 0 | 13 |
| 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1971 | 96–16 | 85.7% | — | 2,174 | 2 | 26 |
| 20 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1972 | 89–10 | 89.9% | — | 2,238 | 2 | 38 |
| 21 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1973 | 102–14 | 87.9% | — | 2,297 | 2 | 50 |
| 22 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1974 | 64–11 | 85.3% | — | 2,326 | 3 | 58 |
| 23 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1975 | 53–13 | 80.3% | — | 2,265 | 4 | 62 |
| 24 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1976 | 57–6 | 90.5% | — | 2,425 | 5 | 69 |
| 25 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1977 | 20–1 | 95.2% | — | 2,435 | 6 | 73 |
| 26 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1978 | 47–9 | 83.9% | — | 2,353 | 6 | 79 |
| 27 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1979 | 53–11 | 82.8% | — | 2,314 | 6 | 83 |
| 28 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1980 | 38–19 | 66.7% | — | 2,165 | 7 | 84 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1981 | 5–3 | 62.5% | — | 2,144 | 7 | 84 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1982 | 6–6 | 50.0% | — | 2,052 | 7 | 84 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1983 | 9–7 | 56.2% | — | 1,943 | 7 | 84 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1985 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,914 | 7 | 84 |