H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 08:25 UTC
Rita Grande vs Nathalie Herreman H2H: 0-1
Nathalie Herreman holds a 1–0 lead over Rita Grande in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Nathalie Herreman leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Nathalie Herreman won the 1991 Rome second round 6-2 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.
ITA
Age 51
Right-Handed
177 cm / 5'10"
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 8, 1991* | Rome | WTA 1000 | R64 | Clay | Nathalie Herreman | 6-2 6-1 | Rita Grande | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rita Grande | #1,172 | #24 | 1,020 | 1,755 | 172 | 218 | 44.1% | 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 | Rita Grande | Nathalie Herreman | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | 1991 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #370 | 1,471 | 0 | 0 | 1982 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,492 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1983 | 4–3 | 57.1% | — | 1,548 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 1993 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #186 | 1,456 | 0 | 0 | 1984 | 8–12 | 40.0% | #125 | 1,564 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1994 | 7–12 | 36.8% | #146 | 1,491 | 0 | 0 | 1985 | 3–6 | 33.3% | #126 | 1,543 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1995 | 10–11 | 47.6% | #72 | 1,591 | 0 | 0 | 1986 | 16–11 | 59.3% | #42 | 1,718 | 0 | 1 |
| 21 | 1996 | 10–15 | 40.0% | #71 | 1,627 | 0 | 0 | 1987 | 11–20 | 35.5% | #91 | 1,641 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 1997 | 15–18 | 45.5% | #44 | 1,676 | 0 | 0 | 1988 | 8–12 | 40.0% | #95 | 1,606 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 1998 | 12–23 | 34.3% | #59 | 1,584 | 0 | 0 | 1989 | 8–17 | 32.0% | #134 | 1,568 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 1999 | 21–18 | 53.8% | #54 | 1,679 | 0 | 0 | 1990 | 19–20 | 48.7% | #62 | 1,684 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 2000 | 15–21 | 41.7% | #77 | 1,602 | 0 | 0 | 1991 | 12–21 | 36.4% | #121 | 1,619 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2001 | 35–26 | 57.4% | #24 | 1,742 | 0 | 2 | 1992 | 6–16 | 27.3% | #183 | 1,556 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2002 | 21–27 | 43.8% | #46 | 1,641 | 0 | 2 | 1993 | 7–9 | 43.8% | #107 | 1,622 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2003 | 14–25 | 35.9% | #70 | 1,534 | 0 | 3 | 1994 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #181 | 1,584 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 2004 | 12–18 | 40.0% | #104 | 1,536 | 0 | 3 | 1995 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #386 | 1,580 | 0 | 1 |
| 30 | 2005 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #1088 | 1,518 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |