H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Patty Fendick vs Nathalie Herreman H2H: 0-1
Nathalie Herreman holds a 1–0 lead over Patty Fendick in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Nathalie Herreman leads 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Nathalie Herreman won the 1988 Eastbourne second round 6-4 1-6 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.
USA
Age 61
Right-Handed
165 cm / 5'5"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
FRA
Age 60
Left-Handed
164 cm / 5'5"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 15, 1988* | Eastbourne | WTA 250 | R64 | Grass | Nathalie Herreman | 6-4 1-6 6-1 | Patty Fendick | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Patty Fendick | #360 | #19 | 55 | 1,883 | 199 | 162 | 55.1% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
| Nathalie Herreman | #886 | #42 | 20 | 1,728 | 103 | 154 | 40.1% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
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 | Patty Fendick | Nathalie Herreman | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 |
| 17 | 1982 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,499 | 0 | 0 | 1983 | 4–3 | 57.1% | — | 1,548 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 1983 | 1–8 | 11.1% | — | 1,430 | 0 | 0 | 1984 | 8–12 | 40.0% | #125 | 1,564 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1984 | 2–1 | 66.7% | #120 | 1,470 | 0 | 0 | 1985 | 3–6 | 33.3% | #126 | 1,543 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1985 | 6–8 | 42.9% | #83 | 1,551 | 0 | 0 | 1986 | 16–11 | 59.3% | #42 | 1,718 | 0 | 1 |
| 21 | 1986 | 8–6 | 57.1% | #95 | 1,643 | 0 | 0 | 1987 | 11–20 | 35.5% | #91 | 1,641 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 1987 | 8–9 | 47.1% | #79 | 1,674 | 0 | 0 | 1988 | 8–12 | 40.0% | #95 | 1,606 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 1988 | 38–16 | 70.4% | #22 | 1,798 | 0 | 2 | 1989 | 8–17 | 32.0% | #134 | 1,568 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 1989 | 22–13 | 62.9% | #31 | 1,762 | 0 | 3 | 1990 | 19–20 | 48.7% | #62 | 1,684 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 1990 | 16–15 | 51.6% | #42 | 1,740 | 0 | 3 | 1991 | 12–21 | 36.4% | #121 | 1,619 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 1991 | 16–18 | 47.1% | #56 | 1,690 | 0 | 3 | 1992 | 6–16 | 27.3% | #183 | 1,556 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 1992 | 17–17 | 50.0% | #43 | 1,779 | 0 | 3 | 1993 | 7–9 | 43.8% | #107 | 1,622 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 1993 | 29–17 | 63.0% | #27 | 1,839 | 0 | 3 | 1994 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #181 | 1,584 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 1994 | 23–20 | 53.5% | #50 | 1,725 | 0 | 3 | 1995 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #386 | 1,580 | 0 | 1 |
| 30 | 1995 | 13–13 | 50.0% | #57 | 1,691 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |