H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Nathalie Dechy vs Anke Huber H2H: 0-3
Anke Huber holds a 3–0 lead over Nathalie Dechy in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Anke Huber leads 1–0 on carpet and 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Anke Huber won the 2001 Luxembourg third round 6-1 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.
FRA
Age 47
Right-Handed
178 cm / 5'10"
H2H
0
–
3
3 main draw meetings
GER
Age 51
Right-Handed
173 cm / 5'8"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 25, 2001* | Luxembourg | WTA 250 | R32 | Hard | Anke Huber | 6-1 6-3 | Nathalie Dechy | Match data |
| Feb 16, 2001* | Nice | WTA 500 | R16 | Carpet | Anke Huber | 6-2 4-6 6-3 | Nathalie Dechy | Match data |
| Apr 16, 2000* | Estoril | WTA 250 | F | Clay | Anke Huber | 6-2 1-6 7-5 | Nathalie Dechy | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nathalie Dechy | #88 | #11 | 1,773 | 1,917 | 291 | 270 | 51.9% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Anke Huber | #18 | #4 | 2,721 | 2,130 | 393 | 203 | 65.9% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 10 | 12 |
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 | Nathalie Dechy | Anke Huber | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 14 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1989 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #199 | 1,517 | 0 | 0 |
| 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1990 | 14–9 | 60.9% | #37 | 1,708 | 0 | 1 |
| 16 | 1995 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #237 | 1,481 | 0 | 0 | 1991 | 30–13 | 69.8% | #14 | 1,959 | 0 | 2 |
| 17 | 1996 | 6–11 | 35.3% | #84 | 1,501 | 0 | 0 | 1992 | 28–15 | 65.1% | #11 | 1,964 | 0 | 2 |
| 18 | 1997 | 6–11 | 35.3% | #73 | 1,539 | 0 | 0 | 1993 | 41–15 | 73.2% | #10 | 2,056 | 0 | 3 |
| 19 | 1998 | 12–17 | 41.4% | #50 | 1,619 | 0 | 0 | 1994 | 38–16 | 70.4% | #12 | 2,027 | 0 | 6 |
| 20 | 1999 | 32–23 | 58.2% | #25 | 1,790 | 0 | 0 | 1995 | 41–15 | 73.2% | #10 | 2,091 | 0 | 7 |
| 21 | 2000 | 28–19 | 59.6% | #26 | 1,777 | 0 | 0 | 1996 | 45–15 | 75.0% | #7 | 2,055 | 0 | 10 |
| 22 | 2001 | 21–25 | 45.7% | #43 | 1,626 | 0 | 0 | 1997 | 34–24 | 58.6% | #13 | 1,954 | 0 | 10 |
| 23 | 2002 | 33–24 | 57.9% | #20 | 1,770 | 0 | 0 | 1998 | 25–18 | 58.1% | #21 | 1,898 | 0 | 10 |
| 24 | 2003 | 31–18 | 63.3% | #29 | 1,819 | 0 | 1 | 1999 | 32–26 | 55.2% | #16 | 1,886 | 0 | 10 |
| 25 | 2004 | 33–23 | 58.9% | #21 | 1,810 | 0 | 1 | 2000 | 29–16 | 64.4% | #19 | 1,898 | 0 | 12 |
| 26 | 2005 | 40–26 | 60.6% | #12 | 1,798 | 0 | 1 | 2001 | 35–20 | 63.6% | #18 | 1,834 | 0 | 12 |
| 27 | 2006 | 16–25 | 39.0% | #48 | 1,649 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 2007 | 16–19 | 45.7% | #68 | 1,651 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 2008 | 13–16 | 44.8% | #69 | 1,670 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 2009 | 4–11 | 26.7% | #88 | 1,582 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |