H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 14:16 UTC
Mary Ann Eisel vs Veronica Burton H2H: 2-1
Mary Ann Eisel holds a 2–1 lead over Veronica Burton in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Veronica Burton leads 1–0 on carpet, while Mary Ann Eisel leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Mary Ann Eisel won the 1974 Sebring semifinal 6-2 7-5.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 9, 1974* | Sebring | WTA 250 | SF | Clay | Mary Ann Eisel | 6-2 7-5 | Veronica Burton | Match data |
| Nov 6, 1969* | Torquay | WTA 250 | R32 | Carpet | Veronica Burton | 6-1 8-10 6-2 | Mary Ann Eisel | Match data |
| May 30, 1968* | Surbiton | WTA 250 | R32 | Grass | Mary Ann Eisel | 6-4 4-6 6-4 | Veronica Burton | 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 |
| Veronica Burton | — | — | — | 1,832 | 139 | 131 | 51.5% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
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 | Veronica Burton | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1968 | 4–8 | 33.3% | — | 1,472 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1969 | 9–15 | 37.5% | — | 1,499 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1970 | 9–15 | 37.5% | — | 1,497 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1971 | 9–14 | 39.1% | — | 1,530 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1972 | 24–19 | 55.8% | — | 1,641 | 0 | 1 |
| 21 | 1968 | 45–22 | 67.2% | — | 1,774 | 0 | 3 | 1973 | 39–20 | 66.1% | — | 1,746 | 0 | 2 |
| 22 | 1969 | 54–23 | 70.1% | — | 1,800 | 0 | 7 | 1974 | 19–15 | 55.9% | — | 1,688 | 0 | 3 |
| 23 | 1970 | 33–20 | 62.3% | — | 1,769 | 0 | 11 | 1975 | 6–7 | 46.2% | — | 1,661 | 0 | 3 |
| 24 | 1971 | 26–19 | 57.8% | — | 1,862 | 0 | 11 | 1976 | 2–6 | 25.0% | — | 1,595 | 0 | 3 |
| 25 | 1972 | 3–6 | 33.3% | — | 1,825 | 0 | 11 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 26 | 1973 | 2–1 | 66.7% | — | 1,837 | 0 | 11 | 1978 | 12–6 | 66.7% | — | 1,644 | 0 | 3 |
| 27 | 1974 | 7–2 | 77.8% | — | 1,860 | 0 | 12 | 1979 | 5–5 | 50.0% | — | 1,627 | 0 | 3 |
| 28 | 1975 | 1–1 | 50.0% | — | 1,852 | 0 | 12 | 1980 | 1–1 | 50.0% | — | 1,617 | 0 | 3 |
| 29 | 1976 | 1–1 | 50.0% | — | 1,840 | 0 | 12 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |