H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Miriam Oremans vs Elena Makarova H2H: 2-0
Miriam Oremans holds a 2–0 lead over Elena Makarova in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Miriam Oremans leads 1–0 on clay and 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Miriam Oremans won the 1998 Roland Garros first round 6-1 1-6 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.
NED
Age 53
Right-Handed
169 cm / 5'7"
H2H
2
–
0
2 main draw meetings
Age 53
179 cm / 5'10"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 27, 1998* | Roland Garros | Grand Slam | R128 | Clay | Miriam Oremans | 6-1 1-6 6-3 | Elena Makarova | Match data |
| Aug 27, 1997* | US Open | Grand Slam | R128 | Hard | Miriam Oremans | 3-6 6-4 6-4 | Elena Makarova | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Miriam Oremans | #193 | #25 | 585 | 1,809 | 161 | 181 | 47.1% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Elena Makarova | — | — | — | 1,755 | 59 | 72 | 45.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
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 | Miriam Oremans | Elena Makarova | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 1990 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #185 | 1,519 | 0 | 0 | 1990 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,492 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 1991 | 3–9 | 25.0% | #149 | 1,471 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 1992 | 8–12 | 40.0% | #130 | 1,532 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 1993 | 28–20 | 58.3% | #31 | 1,747 | 0 | 0 | 1993 | 2–4 | 33.3% | — | 1,505 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1994 | 14–18 | 43.8% | #48 | 1,733 | 0 | 0 | 1994 | 14–13 | 51.9% | — | 1,673 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1995 | 19–18 | 51.4% | #42 | 1,769 | 0 | 0 | 1995 | 15–14 | 51.7% | — | 1,749 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 1996 | 17–18 | 48.6% | #46 | 1,714 | 0 | 0 | 1996 | 12–16 | 42.9% | — | 1,692 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 1997 | 15–15 | 50.0% | #46 | 1,774 | 0 | 0 | 1997 | 8–12 | 40.0% | — | 1,708 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 1998 | 13–16 | 44.8% | #57 | 1,729 | 0 | 0 | 1998 | 5–9 | 35.7% | — | 1,648 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 1999 | 8–17 | 32.0% | #98 | 1,628 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 3–3 | 50.0% | — | 1,633 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2000 | 16–12 | 57.1% | #64 | 1,701 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 2001 | 13–15 | 46.4% | #84 | 1,686 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 2002 | 6–10 | 37.5% | #124 | 1,611 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |