H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Marilyn Tesch vs Gail Sherriff H2H: 0-1
Gail Sherriff holds a 1–0 lead over Marilyn Tesch in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Gail Sherriff leads 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Gail Sherriff won the 1969 Melbourne third round 6-1 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.
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 9, 1969* | Melbourne | WTA 250 | R32 | Grass | Gail Sherriff | 6-1 6-3 | 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 |
| 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 | Marilyn Tesch | Gail Sherriff | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 23 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1968 | 65–14 | 82.3% | — | 1,847 | 0 | 13 |
| 24 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1969 | 45–22 | 67.2% | — | 1,800 | 0 | 17 |
| 25 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1970 | 52–19 | 73.2% | — | 1,933 | 0 | 21 |
| 26 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1971 | 49–20 | 71.0% | — | 1,921 | 0 | 23 |
| 27 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1972 | 35–13 | 72.9% | — | 1,860 | 0 | 28 |
| 28 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1973 | 3–7 | 30.0% | — | 1,758 | 0 | 28 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1974 | 30–10 | 75.0% | — | 1,877 | 0 | 34 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1975 | 17–10 | 63.0% | — | 1,833 | 0 | 38 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1976 | 18–10 | 64.3% | — | 1,793 | 0 | 38 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1977 | 0–3 | 0.0% | — | 1,755 | 0 | 38 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1978 | 15–6 | 71.4% | — | 1,772 | 0 | 39 |
| 34 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 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 |