H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Nathalie Herreman vs Silke Meier H2H: 2-0
Nathalie Herreman holds a 2–0 lead over Silke Meier in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Nathalie Herreman leads 1–0 on clay and 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Nathalie Herreman won the 1989 Sydney second round 7-5 4-6 6-1.
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 60
Left-Handed
164 cm / 5'5"
H2H
2
–
0
2 main draw meetings
GER
Age 58
Right-Handed
185 cm / 6'1"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 11, 1989* | Sydney | WTA 500 | R64 | Hard | Nathalie Herreman | 7-5 4-6 6-1 | Silke Meier | Match data |
| May 15, 1985* | Berlin | WTA 500 | R64 | Clay | Nathalie Herreman | 6-3 6-4 | Silke Meier | 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 Herreman | #886 | #42 | 20 | 1,728 | 103 | 154 | 40.1% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Silke Meier | #948 | #40 | 101 | 1,667 | 81 | 141 | 36.5% | 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 Herreman | Silke Meier | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | 1982 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,492 | 0 | 0 | 1985 | 3–3 | 50.0% | #164 | 1,512 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 1983 | 4–3 | 57.1% | — | 1,548 | 0 | 0 | 1986 | 10–10 | 50.0% | #85 | 1,594 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 1984 | 8–12 | 40.0% | #125 | 1,564 | 0 | 0 | 1987 | 10–13 | 43.5% | #50 | 1,592 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1985 | 3–6 | 33.3% | #126 | 1,543 | 0 | 0 | 1988 | 8–16 | 33.3% | #99 | 1,590 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1986 | 16–11 | 59.3% | #42 | 1,718 | 0 | 1 | 1989 | 7–14 | 33.3% | #148 | 1,555 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1987 | 11–20 | 35.5% | #91 | 1,641 | 0 | 1 | 1990 | 6–13 | 31.6% | #132 | 1,529 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1988 | 8–12 | 40.0% | #95 | 1,606 | 0 | 1 | 1991 | 4–9 | 30.8% | #138 | 1,511 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 1989 | 8–17 | 32.0% | #134 | 1,568 | 0 | 1 | 1992 | 10–13 | 43.5% | #80 | 1,586 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 1990 | 19–20 | 48.7% | #62 | 1,684 | 0 | 1 | 1993 | 6–16 | 27.3% | #151 | 1,520 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 1991 | 12–21 | 36.4% | #121 | 1,619 | 0 | 1 | 1994 | 5–9 | 35.7% | #113 | 1,528 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 1992 | 6–16 | 27.3% | #183 | 1,556 | 0 | 1 | 1995 | 10–14 | 41.7% | #91 | 1,534 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 1993 | 7–9 | 43.8% | #107 | 1,622 | 0 | 1 | 1996 | 2–10 | 16.7% | #205 | 1,488 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 1994 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #181 | 1,584 | 0 | 1 | 1997 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #234 | 1,482 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 1995 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #386 | 1,580 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |