H2H data updated: 2026-09-14 00:00 UTC

Miriam Oremans vs Laurence Courtois H2H: 1-1

Miriam Oremans and Laurence Courtois are tied 1–1 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Miriam Oremans leads 1–0 on grass, while Laurence Courtois leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Miriam Oremans won the 2000 Birmingham round of 64 6-4 7-6(1).

Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.

Miriam Oremans
NED Age 54 Right-Handed 169 cm / 5'7"
H2H
1 – 1
2 main-draw meetings
Laurence Courtois
BEL Age 50 Right-Handed 172 cm / 5'8"

H2H Match Log

PlayerScorePlayerMatch DataDateRoundTournamentCategorySurface
Miriam Oremans #87 6-4 7-6(1) Laurence Courtois #107 Match data Jun 14, 2000* R64 Birmingham Tier III → modern equivalent WTA 250 Grass
Laurence Courtois #61 7-6(4) 7-6(4) Miriam Oremans #47 Match data Jan 17, 1996* R128 Australian Open Grand Slam Hard

Estimated match date where the exact historical date is unavailable. Arrows show an edition's recorded category and documented modern equivalent; unresolved editions keep their recorded category. Asterisked totals include editions mapped from documented historical predecessor categories. Mapping details.

Career Comparison

Player Current Peak Pts Elo W L Win % GS 1000 including documented historical predecessor categories Finals 500 including documented historical predecessor categories 250 including documented historical predecessor categories Titles
Miriam Oremans #193 #25 585 1,808 162 182 47.1% 0 0 0 0 0 0
Laurence Courtois #484 #37 565 1,701 75 94 44.4% 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 Laurence Courtois
YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles
17 1990 1–1 50.0% #185 1,519 0 0 1993 3–3 50.0% #104 1,520 0 0
18 1991 3–9 25.0% #149 1,472 0 0 1994 8–13 38.1% #105 1,545 0 0
19 1992 8–12 40.0% #130 1,531 0 0 1995 14–14 50.0% #64 1,624 0 0
20 1993 28–20 58.3% #31 1,746 0 0 1996 20–16 55.6% #44 1,697 0 0
21 1994 14–18 43.8% #48 1,733 0 0 1997 4–9 30.8% #183 1,647 0 0
22 1995 19–18 51.4% #42 1,768 0 0 1998 4–9 30.8% #125 1,578 0 0
23 1996 17–18 48.6% #46 1,714 0 0 1999 13–17 43.3% #78 1,546 0 0
24 1997 15–15 50.0% #46 1,773 0 0 2000 6–10 37.5% #130 1,538 0 0
25 1998 13–16 44.8% #57 1,728 0 0 2001 3–3 50.0% #166 1,540 0 0
26 1999 8–17 32.0% #98 1,627 0 0 — — — — — — —
27 2000 17–13 56.7% #64 1,711 0 0 — — — — — — —
28 2001 13–15 46.4% #84 1,690 0 0 — — — — — — —
29 2002 6–10 37.5% #124 1,613 0 0 — — — — — — —

Surface Results by Age

Seasons are aligned by the age each player spent most of that calendar year. Results cover completed main-draw matches. Bold green marks the higher win percentage when both players have at least 5 matches on that surface at the aligned age.

Age Miriam Oremans Laurence Courtois
Yr HardClayGrassCarpet Yr HardClayGrassCarpet
W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win %
17 1990 1 1 2 50.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — 1993 — — — — 1 2 3 33.3% — — — — 2 1 3 66.7%
18 1991 2 5 7 28.6% 1 2 3 33.3% 0 2 2 0.0% — — — — 1994 2 4 6 33.3% 4 5 9 44.4% 0 1 1 0.0% 2 3 5 40.0%
19 1992 6 6 12 50.0% 0 2 2 0.0% 1 2 3 33.3% 1 2 3 33.3% 1995 1 4 5 20.0% 4 4 8 50.0% 4 2 6 66.7% 5 4 9 55.6%
20 1993 16 14 30 53.3% 2 2 4 50.0% 8 2 10 80.0% 2 2 4 50.0% 1996 9 7 16 56.3% 6 4 10 60.0% 3 3 6 50.0% 2 2 4 50.0%
21 1994 5 9 14 35.7% 2 4 6 33.3% 4 3 7 57.1% 3 2 5 60.0% 1997 2 1 3 66.7% 1 5 6 16.7% 0 1 1 0.0% 1 2 3 33.3%
22 1995 7 8 15 46.7% 5 4 9 55.6% 4 3 7 57.1% 3 3 6 50.0% 1998 2 5 7 28.6% 2 3 5 40.0% — — — — 0 1 1 0.0%
23 1996 2 6 8 25.0% 6 5 11 54.5% 6 3 9 66.7% 3 4 7 42.9% 1999 5 7 12 41.7% 6 6 12 50.0% 2 2 4 50.0% 0 2 2 0.0%
24 1997 3 5 8 37.5% 1 4 5 20.0% 6 3 9 66.7% 5 3 8 62.5% 2000 0 2 2 0.0% 6 6 12 50.0% 0 2 2 0.0% — — — —
25 1998 1 6 7 14.3% 4 4 8 50.0% 7 3 10 70.0% 1 3 4 25.0% 2001 1 1 2 50.0% 2 2 4 50.0% — — — — — — — —
26 1999 2 7 9 22.2% 0 5 5 0.0% 4 3 7 57.1% 2 2 4 50.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
27 2000 10 6 16 62.5% 4 4 8 50.0% 3 3 6 50.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
28 2001 5 8 13 38.5% 2 4 6 33.3% 6 3 9 66.7% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
29 2002 1 4 5 20.0% 1 3 4 25.0% 4 3 7 57.1% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Career — 61 85 146 41.8% 28 43 71 39.4% 53 33 86 61.6% 20 21 41 48.8% — 22 31 53 41.5% 32 37 69 46.4% 9 11 20 45.0% 12 15 27 44.4%

Advanced Statistics Comparison by Age

Seasons are aligned by the age each player spent most of that calendar year. Metrics use eligible main-draw results; point statistics use matches with detailed data. Bold green marks the stronger value when both underlying samples are sufficient. Lower is better for Schedule because a negative value means a tougher schedule. Career Schedule is normalized per 100 matches.

Age Miriam Oremans Laurence Courtois
Yr Elo P+ Serve+ Return+ PD TPW% Hard Elo Clay Elo Grass Elo Set Win % Set Margin Dec. Set Tiebreak Pressure+ Schedule Yr Elo P+ Serve+ Return+ PD TPW% Hard Elo Clay Elo Grass Elo Set Win % Set Margin Dec. Set Tiebreak Pressure+ Schedule
17 1990 1520 110.3 — — — — — — — 40.0% -0.60 1–0 — — -0.11 1993 1521 107.7 — — — — +38 +20 — 53.3% +0.73 1–2 (33%) 1–4 (20%) 96.9 +0.37
18 1991 1472 101.8 — — — — +51 +51 — 29.6% -1.00 1–2 (33%) — — +0.66 1994 1545 117.7 — — — — +33 +35 — 40.0% -1.20 4–4 (50%) 3–0 (100%) — +0.11
19 1992 1532 111.4 — — — — +48 — -24 38.6% -0.80 3–1 (75%) 0–1 — +0.45 1995 1625 121.6 — — — — -31 -14 -24 50.0% -0.24 3–3 (50%) 8–3 (73%) 105.7 +0.28
20 1993 1747 146.5 — — — — -74 -220 +26 59.1% +0.56 7–14 (33%) 4–6 (40%) 97.4 +0.65 1996 1698 120.0 — — — — -38 -71 -19 50.0% -0.11 11–5 (69%) 5–2 (71%) 109.5 +1.19
21 1994 1733 131.3 — — — — -44 -192 +24 46.8% -0.26 5–8 (38%) 5–7 (42%) 96.7 +0.41 1997 1648 109.2 — — — — +21 -63 — 37.0% -1.26 1–2 (33%) 3–1 (75%) 99.6 +0.08
22 1995 1769 143.9 — — — — -10 -170 -22 50.0% +0.10 6–4 (60%) 6–7 (46%) 104.5 -0.91 1998 1579 117.9 — — — — +32 -27 — 41.9% -0.13 0–5 (0%) 0–1 — +0.02
23 1996 1714 134.9 — — — — -34 -67 +161 48.1% +0.09 5–4 (56%) 4–5 (44%) 100.2 +0.41 1999 1546 109.3 — — — — +1 +26 +89 45.2% -0.32 6–7 (46%) 3–5 (38%) 97.3 +1.88
24 1997 1774 137.0 — — — — -31 -189 +117 47.9% +0.10 8–7 (53%) 2–7 (22%) 99.3 -1.65 2000 1539 113.0 — — — — — +52 — 40.0% -0.27 4–4 (50%) 1–5 (17%) 95.8 -0.15
25 1998 1728 120.1 — — — — -72 -132 +210 41.5% -0.65 6–1 (86%) 5–7 (42%) 102.7 -0.25 2001 1540 100.3 — — — — — +39 — 47.1% -0.18 3–2 (60%) 2–2 (50%) 101.4 +0.63
26 1999 1628 117.1 — — — — -17 -126 +239 34.0% -1.19 1–2 (33%) 1–1 — -1.78 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
27 2000 1711 126.6 — — — — -8 -186 +166 53.5% +0.13 7–4 (64%) 4–3 (57%) 103.0 +0.23 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
28 2001 1690 122.8 — — — — -15 -187 +242 43.3% -0.55 8–3 (73%) 3–3 (50%) 101.2 -1.04 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
29 2002 1613 100.3 — — — — -1 -157 +280 40.0% -0.60 1–2 (33%) 0–4 (0%) 93.7 +0.42 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Career — 1808 135.6 — — — — -26 -145 +138 46.8% -0.19 59–52 (53%) 34–51 (40%) 97.2 -0.73 — 1701 119.8 — — — — -4 +2 +6 45.3% -0.37 33–34 (49%) 26–23 (53%) 102.4 +2.66

Career Rivalries

Each player's five most-played main-draw opponents. The current matchup is highlighted when it appears in a player's top five.