H2H data updated: 2026-09-13 00:00 UTC

Venus Williams vs Miriam Oremans H2H: 2-0

Venus Williams holds a 2–0 lead over Miriam Oremans in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Venus Williams leads 1–0 on grass and 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Venus Williams won the 2001 Miami Open round of 64 6-2 6-0.

Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.

Venus Williams
United States Age 46 Right-Handed 185 cm / 6'1"
H2H
2 – 0
2 main-draw meetings
Miriam Oremans
NED Age 54 Right-Handed 169 cm / 5'7"

H2H Match Log

PlayerScorePlayerMatch DataDateRoundTournamentCategorySurface
Venus Williams #3 6-2 6-0 Miriam Oremans #81 Match data Mar 23, 2001* R64 Miami Open Tier I → modern equivalent WTA 1000 Hard
Venus Williams #5 6-1 7-5 Miriam Oremans #55 Match data Jun 23, 1999* R128 Wimbledon Grand Slam Grass

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 Olympics 1000 including documented historical predecessor categories Finals 500 including documented historical predecessor categories 250 including documented historical predecessor categories Titles
Venus Williams #469 #1 7,452 2,368 782 299 72.3% 7 1 9 2 19 11 49
Miriam Oremans #193 #25 585 1,808 162 182 47.1% 0 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 Venus Williams Miriam Oremans
YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles
14 1994 1–1 50.0% — 1,525 0 0 — — — — — — —
15 1995 2–3 40.0% #205 1,561 0 0 — — — — — — —
16 1996 2–5 28.6% #216 1,570 0 0 — — — — — — —
17 1997 20–13 60.6% #22 1,830 0 0 1990 1–1 50.0% #185 1,519 0 0
18 1998 51–13 79.7% #5 2,099 0 3 1991 3–9 25.0% #149 1,472 0 0
19 1999 57–12 82.6% #3 2,248 0 9 1992 8–12 40.0% #130 1,531 0 0
20 2000 41–4 91.1% #3 2,337 2 15 1993 28–20 58.3% #31 1,746 0 0
21 2001 46–6 88.5% #3 2,358 4 21 1994 14–18 43.8% #48 1,733 0 0
22 2002 63–9 87.5% #2 2,303 4 28 1995 19–18 51.4% #42 1,768 0 0
23 2003 24–5 82.8% #11 2,260 4 29 1996 17–18 48.6% #46 1,714 0 0
24 2004 42–14 75.0% #9 2,077 4 31 1997 15–15 50.0% #46 1,773 0 0
25 2005 34–10 77.3% #10 2,128 5 33 1998 13–16 44.8% #57 1,728 0 0
26 2006 13–6 68.4% #46 2,035 5 33 1999 8–17 32.0% #98 1,627 0 0
27 2007 46–10 82.1% #8 2,059 6 36 2000 17–13 56.7% #64 1,711 0 0
28 2008 40–11 78.4% #6 2,138 7 39 2001 13–15 46.4% #84 1,690 0 0
29 2009 38–16 70.4% #6 1,988 7 41 2002 6–10 37.5% #124 1,613 0 0
30 2010 38–7 84.4% #5 2,061 7 43 — — — — — — —
31 2011 8–4 66.7% #102 2,017 7 43 — — — — — — —
32 2012 24–9 72.7% #24 2,016 7 44 — — — — — — —
33 2013 15–11 57.7% #47 1,910 7 44 — — — — — — —
34 2014 33–15 68.8% #18 1,888 7 45 — — — — — — —
35 2015 39–14 73.6% #7 1,971 7 48 — — — — — — —
36 2016 24–15 61.5% #17 1,817 7 49 — — — — — — —
37 2017 38–15 71.7% #5 1,941 7 49 — — — — — — —
38 2018 15–11 57.7% #39 1,872 7 49 — — — — — — —
39 2019 20–15 57.1% #52 1,819 7 49 — — — — — — —
40 2020 1–8 11.1% #79 1,713 7 49 — — — — — — —
41 2021 3–9 25.0% #318 1,647 7 49 — — — — — — —
42 2022 0–4 0.0% #1000 1,602 7 49 — — — — — — —
43 2023 3–7 30.0% #412 1,592 7 49 — — — — — — —

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 Venus Williams Miriam Oremans
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 1994 — — — — — — — — — — — — 1 1 2 50.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
15 1995 0 2 2 0.0% — — — — — — — — 2 1 3 66.7% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
16 1996 2 3 5 40.0% 0 1 1 0.0% — — — — 0 1 1 0.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
17 1997 15 7 22 68.2% 2 2 4 50.0% 1 2 3 33.3% 2 2 4 50.0% 1990 1 1 2 50.0% — — — — — — — — — — — —
18 1998 36 8 44 81.8% 9 2 11 81.8% 4 2 6 66.7% 2 1 3 66.7% 1991 2 5 7 28.6% 1 2 3 33.3% 0 2 2 0.0% — — — —
19 1999 34 6 40 85.0% 12 2 14 85.7% 4 1 5 80.0% 7 3 10 70.0% 1992 6 6 12 50.0% 0 2 2 0.0% 1 2 3 33.3% 1 2 3 33.3%
20 2000 25 0 25 100.0% 6 3 9 66.7% 7 0 7 100.0% 3 1 4 75.0% 1993 16 14 30 53.3% 2 2 4 50.0% 8 2 10 80.0% 2 2 4 50.0%
21 2001 32 3 35 91.4% 5 2 7 71.4% 7 0 7 100.0% 2 1 3 66.7% 1994 5 9 14 35.7% 2 4 6 33.3% 4 3 7 57.1% 3 2 5 60.0%
22 2002 35 5 40 87.5% 14 2 16 87.5% 6 1 7 85.7% 8 1 9 88.9% 1995 7 8 15 46.7% 5 4 9 55.6% 4 3 7 57.1% 3 3 6 50.0%
23 2003 8 2 10 80.0% 6 2 8 75.0% 6 1 7 85.7% 4 0 4 100.0% 1996 2 6 8 25.0% 6 5 11 54.5% 6 3 9 66.7% 3 4 7 42.9%
24 2004 21 9 30 70.0% 17 2 19 89.5% 1 1 2 50.0% 3 2 5 60.0% 1997 3 5 8 37.5% 1 4 5 20.0% 6 3 9 66.7% 5 3 8 62.5%
25 2005 18 7 25 72.0% 9 3 12 75.0% 7 0 7 100.0% — — — — 1998 1 6 7 14.3% 4 4 8 50.0% 7 3 10 70.0% 1 3 4 25.0%
26 2006 1 2 3 33.3% 10 3 13 76.9% 2 1 3 66.7% — — — — 1999 2 7 9 22.2% 0 5 5 0.0% 4 3 7 57.1% 2 2 4 50.0%
27 2007 27 5 32 84.4% 12 5 17 70.6% 7 0 7 100.0% — — — — 2000 10 6 16 62.5% 4 4 8 50.0% 3 3 6 50.0% — — — —
28 2008 29 9 38 76.3% 4 2 6 66.7% 7 0 7 100.0% — — — — 2001 5 8 13 38.5% 2 4 6 33.3% 6 3 9 66.7% — — — —
29 2009 21 11 32 65.6% 11 4 15 73.3% 6 1 7 85.7% — — — — 2002 1 4 5 20.0% 1 3 4 25.0% 4 3 7 57.1% — — — —
30 2010 19 3 22 86.4% 15 3 18 83.3% 4 1 5 80.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
31 2011 3 2 5 60.0% — — — — 5 2 7 71.4% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
32 2012 14 3 17 82.4% 8 4 12 66.7% 2 2 4 50.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
33 2013 12 8 20 60.0% 3 3 6 50.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
34 2014 27 11 38 71.1% 4 3 7 57.1% 2 1 3 66.7% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
35 2015 34 10 44 77.3% 2 3 5 40.0% 3 1 4 75.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
36 2016 14 11 25 56.0% 5 3 8 62.5% 5 1 6 83.3% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
37 2017 26 11 37 70.3% 6 3 9 66.7% 6 1 7 85.7% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
38 2018 12 7 19 63.2% 1 3 4 25.0% 2 1 3 66.7% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
39 2019 16 11 27 59.3% 2 2 4 50.0% 2 2 4 50.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
40 2020 1 6 7 14.3% 0 2 2 0.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
41 2021 2 4 6 33.3% 0 4 4 0.0% 1 1 2 50.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
42 2022 0 4 4 0.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
43 2023 2 4 6 33.3% — — — — 1 3 4 25.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Career — 487 189 676 72.0% 163 69 232 70.3% 98 27 125 78.4% 34 14 48 70.8% — 61 85 146 41.8% 28 43 71 39.4% 53 33 86 61.6% 20 21 41 48.8%

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 Venus Williams Miriam Oremans
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 1994 1526 122.1 — — — — — — — 60.0% 0.00 0–1 — — -0.18 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
15 1995 1561 123.9 — — — — +29 — — 36.4% -0.36 1–0 0–1 — -0.31 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
16 1996 1570 134.2 — — — — +31 — — 46.7% +0.47 1–2 (33%) 1–0 — -0.34 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
17 1997 1831 160.2 — — — — +5 -255 -230 55.8% +0.44 8–5 (62%) 4–3 (57%) 108.3 -1.92 1990 1520 110.3 — — — — — — — 40.0% -0.60 1–0 — — -0.11
18 1998 2100 174.0 — — — — +4 -331 -385 75.6% +2.04 9–4 (69%) 4–3 (57%) 108.8 -0.82 1991 1472 101.8 — — — — +51 +51 — 29.6% -1.00 1–2 (33%) — — +0.66
19 1999 2248 179.2 — — — — +7 -300 -461 77.5% +1.83 10–5 (67%) 9–4 (69%) 105.8 -4.08 1992 1532 111.4 — — — — +48 — -24 38.6% -0.80 3–1 (75%) 0–1 — +0.45
20 2000 2337 171.5 — — — — +16 -397 -317 84.0% +2.34 8–2 (80%) 6–3 (67%) 106.2 -2.30 1993 1747 146.5 — — — — -74 -220 +26 59.1% +0.56 7–14 (33%) 4–6 (40%) 97.4 +0.65
21 2001 2358 172.4 — — — — +31 -379 -127 83.8% +2.48 8–1 (89%) 10–3 (77%) 106.1 -1.53 1994 1733 131.3 — — — — -44 -192 +24 46.8% -0.26 5–8 (38%) 5–7 (42%) 96.7 +0.41
22 2002 2303 175.2 — — — — +58 -205 -10 81.3% +2.44 12–4 (75%) 7–3 (70%) 101.1 -2.34 1995 1769 143.9 — — — — -10 -170 -22 50.0% +0.10 6–4 (60%) 6–7 (46%) 104.5 -0.91
23 2003 2261 155.8 +4.06 +5.13 1.337 56.1% +107 -163 +33 81.0% +2.37 4–3 (57%) 1–2 (33%) 97.7 -1.73 1996 1714 134.9 — — — — -34 -67 +161 48.1% +0.09 5–4 (56%) 4–5 (44%) 100.2 +0.41
24 2004 2078 159.0 +4.27 +3.93 1.315 55.7% +59 +131 — 75.7% +1.99 6–3 (67%) 8–6 (57%) 99.4 +0.68 1997 1774 137.0 — — — — -31 -189 +117 47.9% +0.10 8–7 (53%) 2–7 (22%) 99.3 -1.65
25 2005 2128 165.4 +4.52 +4.90 1.293 55.5% +29 +38 +223 75.0% +2.03 6–4 (60%) 7–2 (78%) 102.9 -2.36 1998 1728 120.1 — — — — -72 -132 +210 41.5% -0.65 6–1 (86%) 5–7 (42%) 102.7 -0.25
26 2006 2035 136.6 +3.30 +3.85 1.231 54.0% +67 +87 +280 63.8% +0.94 5–4 (56%) 3–2 (60%) 97.6 -0.08 1999 1628 117.1 — — — — -17 -126 +239 34.0% -1.19 1–2 (33%) 1–1 — -1.78
27 2007 2059 153.9 +5.55 +3.98 1.286 55.2% +31 +23 +331 79.0% +2.10 6–6 (50%) 6–5 (55%) 95.6 -1.59 2000 1711 126.6 — — — — -8 -186 +166 53.5% +0.13 7–4 (64%) 4–3 (57%) 103.0 +0.23
28 2008 2138 163.5 +7.00 +3.95 1.260 54.6% -5 -109 +293 74.6% +1.81 7–5 (58%) 5–6 (45%) 99.1 -1.46 2001 1690 122.8 — — — — -15 -187 +242 43.3% -0.55 8–3 (73%) 3–3 (50%) 101.2 -1.04
29 2009 1989 162.7 +7.24 +2.88 1.255 54.5% +47 -3 +361 65.1% +1.53 13–10 (57%) 3–12 (20%) 88.0 -2.55 2002 1613 100.3 — — — — -1 -157 +280 40.0% -0.60 1–2 (33%) 0–4 (0%) 93.7 +0.42
30 2010 2062 156.7 +5.33 +3.88 1.244 54.7% +31 -11 +294 79.6% +1.80 6–2 (75%) 5–2 (71%) 104.0 +0.82 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
31 2011 2018 120.4 +4.82 +1.85 1.287 54.7% +52 — +278 70.8% +1.58 3–1 (75%) 0–2 — +0.19 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
32 2012 2016 150.4 +3.65 +3.04 1.127 52.6% +82 +19 +154 65.4% +1.15 9–3 (75%) 5–5 (50%) 99.5 -1.94 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
33 2013 1911 141.0 +0.75 +3.14 1.071 51.5% +85 +50 — 58.1% +0.65 6–6 (50%) 2–4 (33%) 92.5 -0.63 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
34 2014 1888 149.7 +4.15 +2.82 1.178 53.5% +57 +2 +268 66.4% +1.21 10–11 (48%) 5–6 (45%) 93.1 +0.59 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
35 2015 1971 157.4 +3.80 +3.44 1.187 53.2% +43 -131 +141 67.2% +1.27 13–4 (76%) 10–5 (67%) 105.5 -0.59 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
36 2016 1818 133.2 +2.07 +3.27 1.126 52.8% +13 +15 +295 62.0% +0.67 5–9 (36%) 11–4 (73%) 95.7 +1.30 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
37 2017 1941 149.8 +3.49 +3.26 1.155 53.0% -13 -79 +233 67.8% +1.01 11–6 (65%) 11–3 (79%) 106.7 -0.36 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
38 2018 1873 141.1 +0.84 +1.05 1.013 50.4% +44 -80 +237 54.0% +0.33 7–4 (64%) 3–3 (50%) 98.9 +0.67 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
39 2019 1820 145.6 +0.36 +1.07 0.992 50.0% +35 -40 +249 51.9% +0.05 9–4 (69%) 6–3 (67%) 103.1 -1.42 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
40 2020 1714 126.0 +0.01 -0.68 0.905 48.2% +47 — — 27.3% -1.14 0–4 (0%) 0–3 (0%) 90.8 -1.11 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
41 2021 1647 111.7 -2.68 -2.16 0.811 45.9% +79 -9 — 29.6% -1.59 1–2 (33%) 0–2 — -0.85 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
42 2022 1602 107.5 -2.82 -1.21 0.703 43.0% +66 — — 11.1% -2.78 0–1 0–1 — 0.00 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
43 2023 1593 114.1 -1.10 -0.46 0.880 47.2% +55 — +447 40.0% -1.00 1–4 (20%) 3–1 (75%) 95.5 -0.01 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Career — 2369 167.3 +3.54 +2.76 1.146 52.9% +33 -76 +111 68.9% +1.40 185–126 (59%) 137–101 (58%) 99.2 -2.45 — 1808 135.6 — — — — -26 -145 +138 46.8% -0.19 59–52 (53%) 34–51 (40%) 97.2 -0.73

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.