H2H data updated: 2026-10-28 00:00 UTC

Tanya Harford vs Andrea Jaeger H2H: 0-1

Andrea Jaeger holds a 1–0 lead over Tanya Harford in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Andrea Jaeger leads 1–0 on carpet. Most recently, Andrea Jaeger won the 1980 Porsche Tennis Grand Prix round of 16 6-1 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.

Tanya Harford
RSA Age 67 Right-Handed 162 cm / 5'4"
H2H
0 – 1
1 main-draw meetings
Andrea Jaeger
USA Age 61 Right-Handed 168 cm / 5'6"

H2H Match Log

PlayerScorePlayerMatch DataDateRoundTournamentCategorySurface
Andrea Jaeger 6-1 6-1 Tanya Harford Match data Nov 14, 1980* R16 Porsche Tennis Grand Prix WTA 500 Carpet

Estimated match date where the exact historical date is unavailable. Arrows show an edition's recorded category and documented modern equivalent; unresolved editions keep their recorded category. Asterisked totals include editions mapped from documented historical predecessor categories. Mapping details.

Career Comparison

Player Current Peak Pts Elo W L Win % GS 1000 including documented historical predecessor categories Finals 500 including documented historical predecessor categories 250 including documented historical predecessor categories Titles
Tanya Harford — — — 1,783 50 71 41.3% 0 0 0 0 0 0
Andrea Jaeger — #3 — 2,265 262 91 74.2% 0 0 0 0 11 11

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 Tanya Harford Andrea Jaeger
YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles
14 — — — — — — — 1979 2–2 50.0% — 1,522 0 1
15 1974 0–1 0.0% — 1,496 0 0 1980 67–18 78.8% #7 2,156 0 5
16 1975 0–1 0.0% — 1,479 0 0 1981 61–18 77.2% #4 2,181 0 8
17 1976 4–5 44.4% — 1,512 0 0 1982 65–21 75.6% #3 2,202 0 10
18 1977 7–13 35.0% — 1,559 0 0 1983 50–18 73.5% #3 2,105 0 11
19 1978 3–6 33.3% — 1,558 0 0 1984 9–6 60.0% #42 2,025 0 11
20 1979 13–10 56.5% — 1,716 0 0 1985 5–5 50.0% — 1,940 0 11
21 1980 12–20 37.5% — 1,674 0 0 1986 0–1 0.0% — 1,915 0 11
22 1981 8–10 44.4% — 1,630 0 0 1987 3–2 60.0% — 1,900 0 11
23 1982 3–5 37.5% — 1,629 0 0 — — — — — — —

Surface Results by Age

Seasons are aligned by the age each player spent most of that calendar year. Results cover completed main-draw matches. Bold green marks the higher win percentage when both players have at least 5 matches on that surface at the aligned age.

Age Tanya Harford Andrea Jaeger
Yr HardClayGrassCarpet Yr HardClayGrassCarpet
W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win %
14 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1979 1 1 2 50.0% — — — — — — — — — — — —
15 1974 0 1 1 0.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — 1980 25 4 29 86.2% 9 4 13 69.2% 14 3 17 82.4% 19 7 26 73.1%
16 1975 0 1 1 0.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — 1981 8 3 11 72.7% 15 3 18 83.3% 16 5 21 76.2% 22 7 29 75.9%
17 1976 2 2 4 50.0% 2 2 4 50.0% 0 1 1 0.0% — — — — 1982 17 6 23 73.9% 15 5 20 75.0% 11 4 15 73.3% 22 6 28 78.6%
18 1977 1 2 3 33.3% 5 6 11 45.5% 0 3 3 0.0% 1 2 3 33.3% 1983 6 2 8 75.0% 23 5 28 82.1% 9 2 11 81.8% 12 9 21 57.1%
19 1978 0 2 2 0.0% — — — — 0 1 1 0.0% 2 2 4 50.0% 1984 4 1 5 80.0% 0 1 1 0.0% — — — — 5 4 9 55.6%
20 1979 5 6 11 45.5% — — — — 7 3 10 70.0% 1 1 2 50.0% 1985 4 3 7 57.1% 1 1 2 50.0% — — — — 0 1 1 0.0%
21 1980 4 4 8 50.0% — — — — 5 7 12 41.7% 3 9 12 25.0% 1986 0 1 1 0.0% — — — — — — — — — — — —
22 1981 3 3 6 50.0% 3 4 7 42.9% 1 2 3 33.3% 1 1 2 50.0% 1987 — — — — 3 2 5 60.0% — — — — — — — —
23 1982 0 1 1 0.0% 1 2 3 33.3% 2 2 4 50.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Career — 15 22 37 40.5% 11 14 25 44.0% 15 19 34 44.1% 8 15 23 34.8% — 65 21 86 75.6% 66 21 87 75.9% 50 14 64 78.1% 80 34 114 70.2%

Advanced Statistics Comparison by Age

Seasons are aligned by the age each player spent most of that calendar year. Metrics use eligible main-draw results; point statistics use matches with detailed data. Bold green marks the stronger value when both underlying samples are sufficient. Lower is better for Schedule because a negative value means a tougher schedule. Career Schedule is normalized per 100 matches.

Age Tanya Harford Andrea Jaeger
Yr Elo P+ Serve+ Return+ PD TPW% Hard Elo Clay Elo Grass Elo Set Win % Set Margin Dec. Set Tiebreak Pressure+ Schedule Yr Elo P+ Serve+ Return+ PD TPW% Hard Elo Clay Elo Grass Elo Set Win % Set Margin Dec. Set Tiebreak Pressure+ Schedule
14 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1979 1522 115.0 — — — — — — — 50.0% +0.75 — 0–1 — +0.21
15 1974 1497 100.1 — — — — — — — 0.0% -3.50 — — — -0.14 1980 2157 165.9 — — — — -8 -425 -301 74.7% +1.98 9–3 (75%) 6–1 (86%) 114.0 -6.95
16 1975 1479 94.2 — — — — — — — 0.0% -4.00 — — — +0.26 1981 2182 174.7 — — — — +39 -160 -157 70.3% +1.78 15–5 (75%) 4–6 (40%) 106.7 -9.51
17 1976 1512 106.0 — — — — +66 +24 — 44.4% -0.61 0–2 1–0 — +0.58 1982 2203 174.6 — — — — +59 -31 -141 73.9% +1.87 12–2 (86%) 7–2 (78%) 109.9 -8.79
18 1977 1559 123.8 — — — — +23 +25 -87 38.3% -0.58 3–4 (43%) 1–3 (25%) 98.8 +0.83 1983 2105 170.2 — — — — -3 +149 +46 70.7% +1.71 7–4 (64%) 4–4 (50%) 96.1 -4.08
19 1978 1559 111.9 — — — — +30 — — 41.7% -0.71 2–4 (33%) 0–1 — +0.47 1984 2025 144.9 — — — — +15 — — 65.5% +1.52 0–1 0–2 — -0.43
20 1979 1717 133.9 — — — — -53 — -60 51.8% -0.18 7–3 (70%) 3–1 (75%) 108.7 +1.28 1985 1940 112.8 — — — — +12 — — 47.6% -0.76 1–2 (33%) 0–2 — -0.48
21 1980 1674 131.1 — — — — -48 — -27 40.0% -0.81 5–6 (45%) 2–4 (33%) 98.1 -2.35 1986 1915 98.8 — — — — — — — 33.3% -2.33 0–1 1–0 — -0.03
22 1981 1631 111.8 — — — — +34 -42 0 52.4% +0.12 2–6 (25%) 4–3 (57%) 97.4 +2.23 1987 1901 104.0 — — — — — +248 — 60.0% +0.70 2–0 — — +0.19
23 1982 1630 118.5 — — — — — -65 +41 44.4% -0.44 0–2 1–2 (33%) — -0.08 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Career — 1784 129.2 — — — — -14 -5 -32 44.0% -0.51 19–27 (41%) 12–14 (46%) 98.7 +2.57 — 2266 172.3 — — — — +22 -43 -157 71.0% +1.71 46–18 (72%) 22–18 (55%) 109.1 -8.61

Career Rivalries

Each player's five most-played main-draw opponents. The current matchup is highlighted when it appears in a player's top five.