H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Mima Jausovec vs Laura Arraya H2H: 3-0
Mima Jausovec holds a 3–0 lead over Laura Arraya in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Mima Jausovec leads 2–0 on clay and 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Mima Jausovec won the 1985 Hilton Head second round 6-1 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.
SLO
Age 69
Right-Handed
160 cm / 5'3"
H2H
3
–
0
3 main draw meetings
PER
Age 62
Right-Handed
173 cm / 5'8"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 10, 1985* | Hilton Head | WTA 250 | R64 | Clay | Mima Jausovec | 6-1 6-4 | Laura Arraya | Match data |
| Apr 13, 1983* | Amelia Island | WTA 250 | R64 | Clay | Mima Jausovec | 6-3 6-3 | Laura Arraya | Match data |
| Sep 3, 1981* | US Open | Grand Slam | R128 | Hard | Mima Jausovec | 6-2 6-2 | Laura Arraya | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mima Jausovec | #400 | #23 | 2 | 2,088 | 339 | 246 | 57.9% | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 7 |
| Laura Arraya | #192 | #14 | 51 | 1,922 | 270 | 204 | 57.0% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 9 | 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 | Mima Jausovec | Laura Arraya | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 15 | 1972 | 2–0 | 100.0% | — | 1,533 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 16 | 1973 | 2–1 | 66.7% | — | 1,560 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 1974 | 18–13 | 58.1% | — | 1,790 | 0 | 1 | 1981 | 19–8 | 70.4% | — | 1,683 | 0 | 4 |
| 18 | 1975 | 16–19 | 45.7% | — | 1,804 | 0 | 1 | 1982 | 33–17 | 66.0% | — | 1,741 | 0 | 7 |
| 19 | 1976 | 33–16 | 67.3% | — | 1,996 | 0 | 4 | 1983 | 23–23 | 50.0% | — | 1,713 | 0 | 7 |
| 20 | 1977 | 32–21 | 60.4% | — | 2,008 | 1 | 5 | 1984 | 29–18 | 61.7% | #34 | 1,760 | 0 | 8 |
| 21 | 1978 | 29–19 | 60.4% | — | 1,922 | 1 | 6 | 1985 | 17–21 | 44.7% | #63 | 1,693 | 0 | 8 |
| 22 | 1979 | 32–28 | 53.3% | — | 1,866 | 1 | 6 | 1986 | 23–24 | 48.9% | #33 | 1,718 | 0 | 8 |
| 23 | 1980 | 34–22 | 60.7% | — | 1,941 | 1 | 6 | 1987 | 16–14 | 53.3% | #45 | 1,770 | 0 | 8 |
| 24 | 1981 | 57–28 | 67.1% | — | 2,010 | 1 | 6 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 25 | 1982 | 36–24 | 60.0% | — | 1,861 | 1 | 7 | 1989 | 27–12 | 69.2% | #19 | 1,882 | 0 | 10 |
| 26 | 1983 | 23–16 | 59.0% | — | 1,873 | 1 | 7 | 1990 | 26–19 | 57.8% | #21 | 1,821 | 0 | 10 |
| 27 | 1984 | 12–17 | 41.4% | #87 | 1,747 | 1 | 7 | 1991 | 28–17 | 62.2% | #24 | 1,823 | 0 | 10 |
| 28 | 1985 | 9–12 | 42.9% | #82 | 1,695 | 1 | 7 | 1992 | 20–19 | 51.3% | #45 | 1,734 | 0 | 10 |
| 29 | 1986 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #184 | 1,673 | 1 | 7 | 1993 | 9–12 | 42.9% | #71 | 1,683 | 0 | 10 |
| 30 | 1987 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #233 | 1,656 | 1 | 7 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 1988 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #362 | 1,641 | 1 | 7 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |