H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Nathalie Dechy vs Maria Elena Camerin H2H: 2-1
Nathalie Dechy holds a 2–1 lead over Maria Elena Camerin in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Maria Elena Camerin leads 1–0 on clay, while Nathalie Dechy leads 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Nathalie Dechy won the 2006 Stanford third round 0-6 7-6(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
2
–
1
3 main draw meetings
ITA
Age 44
Right-Handed
164 cm / 5'5"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 27, 2006* | Stanford | WTA 500 | R32 | Hard | Nathalie Dechy | 0-6 7-6(6) 6-3 | Maria Elena Camerin | Match data |
| Jun 22, 2005* | Wimbledon | Grand Slam | R128 | Grass | Nathalie Dechy | 7-6(1) 6-1 | Maria Elena Camerin | Match data |
| May 11, 2005* | Rome | WTA 1000 | R64 | Clay | Maria Elena Camerin | 4-6 6-1 6-4 | 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 |
| Maria Elena Camerin | #817 | #41 | 774 | 1,666 | 97 | 147 | 39.8% | 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 | Maria Elena Camerin | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 2001 | 6–5 | 54.5% | #112 | 1,546 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1999 | 32–23 | 58.2% | #25 | 1,790 | 0 | 0 | 2002 | 5–8 | 38.5% | #123 | 1,525 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2000 | 28–19 | 59.6% | #26 | 1,777 | 0 | 0 | 2003 | 3–8 | 27.3% | #100 | 1,495 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2001 | 21–25 | 45.7% | #43 | 1,626 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 21–19 | 52.5% | #43 | 1,657 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2002 | 33–24 | 57.9% | #20 | 1,770 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 11–22 | 33.3% | #99 | 1,563 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2003 | 31–18 | 63.3% | #29 | 1,819 | 0 | 1 | 2006 | 22–23 | 48.9% | #50 | 1,611 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2004 | 33–23 | 58.9% | #21 | 1,810 | 0 | 1 | 2007 | 9–18 | 33.3% | #100 | 1,546 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2005 | 40–26 | 60.6% | #12 | 1,798 | 0 | 1 | 2008 | 5–11 | 31.2% | #104 | 1,511 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2006 | 16–25 | 39.0% | #48 | 1,649 | 0 | 1 | 2009 | 5–14 | 26.3% | #114 | 1,475 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2007 | 16–19 | 45.7% | #68 | 1,651 | 0 | 1 | 2010 | 6–11 | 35.3% | #111 | 1,496 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2008 | 13–16 | 44.8% | #69 | 1,670 | 0 | 1 | 2011 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #177 | 1,491 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2009 | 4–11 | 26.7% | #88 | 1,582 | 0 | 1 | 2012 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #168 | 1,499 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2013 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #192 | 1,520 | 0 | 0 |