H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Mary Ann Eisel vs Lesley Hunt H2H: 1-1
Mary Ann Eisel and Lesley Hunt are tied 1–1 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Mary Ann Eisel leads 1–0 on grass, while Lesley Hunt leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Lesley Hunt won the 1971 Phoenix fourth round 2-6 6-2 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 2, 1971* | Phoenix | WTA 250 | R16 | Hard | Lesley Hunt | 2-6 6-2 6-3 | Mary Ann Eisel | Match data |
| Jan 13, 1968* | Hobart | WTA 250 | QF | Grass | Mary Ann Eisel | 3-6 6-4 6-3 | Lesley Hunt | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mary Ann Eisel | — | — | — | 1,945 | 172 | 95 | 64.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 12 | 12 |
| Lesley Hunt | — | — | — | 1,933 | 306 | 244 | 55.6% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 10 |
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 | Mary Ann Eisel | Lesley Hunt | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1968 | 23–18 | 56.1% | — | 1,596 | 0 | 1 |
| 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1969 | 32–21 | 60.4% | — | 1,735 | 0 | 2 |
| 20 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1970 | 45–20 | 69.2% | — | 1,919 | 0 | 6 |
| 21 | 1968 | 45–22 | 67.2% | — | 1,774 | 0 | 3 | 1971 | 35–27 | 56.5% | — | 1,829 | 0 | 7 |
| 22 | 1969 | 54–23 | 70.1% | — | 1,800 | 0 | 7 | 1972 | 42–27 | 60.9% | — | 1,903 | 0 | 8 |
| 23 | 1970 | 33–20 | 62.3% | — | 1,769 | 0 | 11 | 1973 | 22–25 | 46.8% | — | 1,868 | 0 | 8 |
| 24 | 1971 | 26–19 | 57.8% | — | 1,862 | 0 | 11 | 1974 | 26–17 | 60.5% | — | 1,915 | 0 | 9 |
| 25 | 1972 | 3–6 | 33.3% | — | 1,825 | 0 | 11 | 1975 | 13–16 | 44.8% | — | 1,865 | 0 | 9 |
| 26 | 1973 | 2–1 | 66.7% | — | 1,837 | 0 | 11 | 1976 | 26–22 | 54.2% | — | 1,821 | 0 | 9 |
| 27 | 1974 | 7–2 | 77.8% | — | 1,860 | 0 | 12 | 1977 | 10–13 | 43.5% | — | 1,769 | 0 | 10 |
| 28 | 1975 | 1–1 | 50.0% | — | 1,852 | 0 | 12 | 1978 | 30–30 | 50.0% | — | 1,823 | 0 | 10 |
| 29 | 1976 | 1–1 | 50.0% | — | 1,840 | 0 | 12 | 1979 | 2–8 | 20.0% | — | 1,761 | 0 | 10 |