H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC

Monica Seles vs Kimiko Date Krumm H2H: 3-1

Monica Seles holds a 3–1 lead over Kimiko Date Krumm in their WTA head-to-head. Across 4 main-draw meetings, Monica Seles leads 3–0 on hard courts, while Kimiko Date Krumm leads 1–0 on carpet. Most recently, Kimiko Date Krumm won the 1996 WTA Tour Championships fourth round 5-4 RET.

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

Monica Seles
USA Age 52 Left-Handed 178 cm / 5'10"
H2H
3 – 1
4 main draw meetings
Kimiko Date Krumm
Age 55 Right-Handed 163 cm / 5'4"

H2H Match Log

DateTournamentCategoryRoundSurfaceWinnerScoreLoserMatch
Nov 18, 1996 WTA Tour Championships WTA Finals R16 Carpet Kimiko Date Krumm 5-4 (ret.) Monica Seles #1 Match data
Sep 21, 1996* Tokyo WTA 500 SF Hard Monica Seles #1 6-4 1-6 7-6 Kimiko Date Krumm Match data
Jan 17, 1992* Australian Open Grand Slam R64 Hard Monica Seles #1 6-2 7-5 Kimiko Date Krumm Match data
Aug 18, 1991* Manhattan Beach WTA 250 F Hard Monica Seles #1 6-3 6-1 Kimiko Date Krumm 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
Kimiko Date Krumm — — — 2,091 241 188 56.2% 0 1 0 3 4 8

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 Kimiko Date Krumm
YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles
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 — — — — — — —
17 1991 74–6 92.5% #1 2,443 4 20 — — — — — — —
18 1992 70–5 93.3% #1 2,499 7 30 1989 6–5 54.5% — 1,562 0 0
19 1993 17–2 89.5% #8 2,485 8 32 1990 10–7 58.8% — 1,664 0 0
20 — — — — — — — 1991 12–11 52.2% — 1,725 0 0
21 1995 11–1 91.7% #1 2,487 8 33 1992 26–13 66.7% — 1,867 0 1
22 1996 43–8 84.3% #2 2,342 9 38 1993 25–11 69.4% — 1,956 0 2
23 1997 45–14 76.3% #5 2,159 9 41 1994 32–12 72.7% — 1,987 0 4
24 1998 42–13 76.4% #6 2,174 9 43 1995 39–12 76.5% — 2,029 0 5
25 1999 36–12 75.0% #6 2,116 9 44 1996 31–13 70.5% — 2,071 0 7
26 2000 51–12 81.0% #4 2,144 9 47 — — — — — — —
27 2001 40–10 80.0% #10 2,127 9 51 — — — — — — —
28 2002 46–13 78.0% #7 2,088 9 53 — — — — — — —
29 2003 10–7 58.8% #60 1,993 9 53 — — — — — — —
37 — — — — — — — 2008 0–1 0.0% — 2,042 0 7
38 — — — — — — — 2009 6–11 35.3% — 1,841 0 8
39 — — — — — — — 2010 19–18 51.4% — 1,814 0 8
40 — — — — — — — 2011 7–24 22.6% — 1,567 0 8
41 — — — — — — — 2012 2–14 12.5% — 1,454 0 8
42 — — — — — — — 2013 12–15 44.4% — 1,575 0 8
43 — — — — — — — 2014 11–14 44.0% — 1,597 0 8
44 — — — — — — — 2015 3–6 33.3% — 1,574 0 8
46 — — — — — — — 2017 0–1 0.0% — 1,564 0 8