H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Rosalyn Fairbank vs Dianne Van Rensburg H2H: 1-2
Dianne Van Rensburg holds a 2–1 lead over Rosalyn Fairbank in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on hard courts, while Dianne Van Rensburg leads 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Dianne Van Rensburg won the 1994 Delray Beach second round 6-3 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.
USA
Age 65
Right-Handed
173 cm / 5'8"
H2H
1
–
2
3 main draw meetings
Age 58
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 2, 1994* | Delray Beach | WTA 250 | R64 | Hard | Dianne Van Rensburg | 6-3 6-3 | Rosalyn Fairbank | Match data |
| Aug 5, 1988* | San Diego | WTA 500 | R16 | Hard | Rosalyn Fairbank | 7-6 6-1 | Dianne Van Rensburg | Match data |
| Jun 12, 1986* | Birmingham | WTA 250 | R32 | Grass | Dianne Van Rensburg | 7-6 4-6 6-3 | Rosalyn Fairbank | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rosalyn Fairbank | #325 | #15 | 51 | 1,933 | 336 | 309 | 52.1% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Dianne Van Rensburg | — | — | — | 1,790 | 82 | 92 | 47.1% | 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 | Rosalyn Fairbank | Dianne Van Rensburg | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 1978 | 3–2 | 60.0% | — | 1,525 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 1979 | 17–10 | 63.0% | — | 1,720 | 0 | 0 | 1986 | 10–8 | 55.6% | — | 1,643 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1980 | 22–20 | 52.4% | — | 1,681 | 0 | 0 | 1987 | 11–19 | 36.7% | — | 1,597 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1981 | 15–22 | 40.5% | — | 1,657 | 0 | 0 | 1988 | 17–19 | 47.2% | — | 1,701 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1982 | 32–21 | 60.4% | — | 1,904 | 0 | 0 | 1989 | 15–20 | 42.9% | — | 1,653 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1983 | 24–19 | 55.8% | — | 1,920 | 0 | 1 | 1990 | 23–16 | 59.0% | — | 1,770 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 1984 | 22–26 | 45.8% | #32 | 1,767 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 24 | 1985 | 28–23 | 54.9% | #38 | 1,806 | 0 | 1 | 1992 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,748 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 1986 | 23–20 | 53.5% | #28 | 1,824 | 0 | 1 | 1993 | 3–4 | 42.9% | — | 1,730 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 1987 | 21–20 | 51.2% | #36 | 1,756 | 0 | 1 | 1994 | 3–4 | 42.9% | — | 1,696 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 1988 | 27–22 | 55.1% | #37 | 1,775 | 0 | 1 | 1995 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,672 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 1989 | 27–18 | 60.0% | #22 | 1,846 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 1990 | 26–20 | 56.5% | #24 | 1,789 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 1991 | 14–19 | 42.4% | #90 | 1,637 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 1992 | 16–16 | 50.0% | #46 | 1,728 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 1993 | 17–19 | 47.2% | #63 | 1,766 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 1994 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #284 | 1,704 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 34 | 1995 | 2–8 | 20.0% | #261 | 1,599 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |