H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Nathalie Dechy vs Catalina Castano H2H: 1-0
Nathalie Dechy holds a 1–0 lead over Catalina Castano in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Nathalie Dechy leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Nathalie Dechy won the 2006 Roland Garros second round 6-4 2-6 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
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
COL
Age 47
Right-Handed
171 cm / 5'7"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 31, 2006* | Roland Garros | Grand Slam | R64 | Clay | Nathalie Dechy | 6-4 2-6 6-3 | Catalina Castano | 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 |
| Catalina Castano | #1,073 | #35 | 623 | 1,703 | 83 | 109 | 43.2% | 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 | Nathalie Dechy | Catalina Castano | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | 1995 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #237 | 1,481 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 1996 | 6–11 | 35.3% | #84 | 1,501 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 1997 | 6–11 | 35.3% | #73 | 1,539 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 1998 | 12–17 | 41.4% | #50 | 1,619 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #232 | 1,484 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1999 | 32–23 | 58.2% | #25 | 1,790 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #110 | 1,487 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2000 | 28–19 | 59.6% | #26 | 1,777 | 0 | 0 | 2001 | 5–9 | 35.7% | #144 | 1,489 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2001 | 21–25 | 45.7% | #43 | 1,626 | 0 | 0 | 2002 | 3–2 | 60.0% | #194 | 1,513 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2002 | 33–24 | 57.9% | #20 | 1,770 | 0 | 0 | 2003 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #135 | 1,518 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2003 | 31–18 | 63.3% | #29 | 1,819 | 0 | 1 | 2004 | 5–8 | 38.5% | #113 | 1,541 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2004 | 33–23 | 58.9% | #21 | 1,810 | 0 | 1 | 2005 | 22–18 | 55.0% | #57 | 1,661 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2005 | 40–26 | 60.6% | #12 | 1,798 | 0 | 1 | 2006 | 22–25 | 46.8% | #54 | 1,544 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2006 | 16–25 | 39.0% | #48 | 1,649 | 0 | 1 | 2007 | 10–20 | 33.3% | #112 | 1,508 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2007 | 16–19 | 45.7% | #68 | 1,651 | 0 | 1 | 2008 | 5–10 | 33.3% | #142 | 1,497 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2008 | 13–16 | 44.8% | #69 | 1,670 | 0 | 1 | 2009 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #214 | 1,470 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2009 | 4–11 | 26.7% | #88 | 1,582 | 0 | 1 | 2010 | 5–5 | 50.0% | #189 | 1,500 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2011 | 2–1 | 66.7% | #254 | 1,514 | 0 | 0 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2012 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #232 | 1,511 | 0 | 0 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2013 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #202 | 1,489 | 0 | 0 |