H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 17:48 UTC
Miriam Oremans vs Elena Pampoulova H2H: 2-1
Miriam Oremans holds a 2–1 lead over Elena Pampoulova in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on clay, while Miriam Oremans leads 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Elena Pampoulova won the 2000 Budapest third round 7-6(3) 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.
NED
Age 53
Right-Handed
169 cm / 5'7"
H2H
2
–
1
3 main draw meetings
BUL
Right-Handed
166 cm / 5'5"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 20, 2000* | Budapest | WTA 250 | R32 | Clay | Elena Pampoulova | 7-6(3) 6-4 | Miriam Oremans | Match data |
| Jul 18, 1998* | Palermo | WTA 250 | QF | Clay | Miriam Oremans | 6-0 6-2 | Elena Pampoulova | Match data |
| Jun 24, 1998* | Wimbledon | Grand Slam | R128 | Grass | Miriam Oremans | 2-6 6-3 6-2 | Elena Pampoulova | 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 Pampoulova | — | — | — | 1,658 | 58 | 96 | 37.7% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
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 Pampoulova | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1989 | 3–4 | 42.9% | — | 1,524 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 1991 | 3–9 | 25.0% | #149 | 1,471 | 0 | 0 | 1990 | 11–13 | 45.8% | — | 1,609 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1992 | 8–12 | 40.0% | #130 | 1,532 | 0 | 0 | 1991 | 5–10 | 33.3% | — | 1,551 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1993 | 28–20 | 58.3% | #31 | 1,747 | 0 | 0 | 1992 | 0–5 | 0.0% | — | 1,493 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1994 | 14–18 | 43.8% | #48 | 1,733 | 0 | 0 | 1993 | 1–4 | 20.0% | — | 1,461 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1995 | 19–18 | 51.4% | #42 | 1,769 | 0 | 0 | 1994 | 6–4 | 60.0% | — | 1,568 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 1996 | 17–18 | 48.6% | #46 | 1,714 | 0 | 0 | 1995 | 0–10 | 0.0% | — | 1,481 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 1997 | 15–15 | 50.0% | #46 | 1,774 | 0 | 0 | 1996 | 4–11 | 26.7% | — | 1,484 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 1998 | 13–16 | 44.8% | #57 | 1,729 | 0 | 0 | 1997 | 8–10 | 44.4% | — | 1,591 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 1999 | 8–17 | 32.0% | #98 | 1,628 | 0 | 0 | 1998 | 9–8 | 52.9% | — | 1,649 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2000 | 16–12 | 57.1% | #64 | 1,701 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 9–15 | 37.5% | — | 1,570 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2001 | 13–15 | 46.4% | #84 | 1,686 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 1–1 | 50.0% | — | 1,575 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 2002 | 6–10 | 37.5% | #124 | 1,611 | 0 | 0 | 2001 | 1–1 | 50.0% | — | 1,567 | 0 | 1 |