H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Monica Seles vs Eva Pfaff H2H: 1-0
Monica Seles holds a 1–0 lead over Eva Pfaff in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Monica Seles leads 1–0 on carpet. Most recently, Monica Seles won the 1990 Tokyo Dentsu fourth round 6-1 6-0.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
USA
Age 52
Left-Handed
178 cm / 5'10"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
GER
Age 65
Right-Handed
173 cm / 5'8"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 29, 1990* | Tokyo Dentsu | WTA 250 | R16 | Carpet | Monica Seles | 6-1 6-0 | Eva Pfaff | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Monica Seles | #223 | #1 | 4,056 | 2,540 | 578 | 121 | 82.7% | 9 | 12 | 3 | 7 | 22 | 53 |
| Eva Pfaff | #420 | #17 | 21 | 1,902 | 155 | 202 | 43.4% | 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 | Monica Seles | Eva Pfaff | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 14 | 1988 | 5–3 | 62.5% | #86 | 1,600 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 15 | 1989 | 33–9 | 78.6% | #6 | 2,002 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 16 | 1990 | 55–6 | 90.2% | #2 | 2,295 | 1 | 10 | 1977 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,481 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 1991 | 74–6 | 92.5% | #1 | 2,443 | 4 | 20 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 1992 | 70–5 | 93.3% | #1 | 2,499 | 7 | 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 1993 | 17–2 | 89.5% | #8 | 2,485 | 8 | 32 | 1980 | 12–11 | 52.2% | — | 1,609 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1981 | 14–19 | 42.4% | — | 1,643 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1995 | 11–1 | 91.7% | #1 | 2,487 | 8 | 33 | 1982 | 18–22 | 45.0% | — | 1,777 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1996 | 43–8 | 84.3% | #2 | 2,342 | 9 | 38 | 1983 | 31–21 | 59.6% | — | 1,856 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 1997 | 45–14 | 76.3% | #5 | 2,159 | 9 | 41 | 1984 | 14–14 | 50.0% | #31 | 1,797 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 1998 | 42–13 | 76.4% | #6 | 2,174 | 9 | 43 | 1985 | 9–11 | 45.0% | #39 | 1,740 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 1999 | 36–12 | 75.0% | #6 | 2,116 | 9 | 44 | 1986 | 14–19 | 42.4% | #58 | 1,689 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2000 | 51–12 | 81.0% | #4 | 2,144 | 9 | 47 | 1987 | 19–20 | 48.7% | #44 | 1,744 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2001 | 40–10 | 80.0% | #10 | 2,127 | 9 | 51 | 1988 | 8–17 | 32.0% | #74 | 1,649 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2002 | 46–13 | 78.0% | #7 | 2,088 | 9 | 53 | 1989 | 12–23 | 34.3% | #104 | 1,586 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2003 | 10–7 | 58.8% | #60 | 1,993 | 9 | 53 | 1990 | 3–12 | 20.0% | #152 | 1,521 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1991 | 1–10 | 9.1% | #203 | 1,469 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1992 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #420 | 1,459 | 0 | 0 |