H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Yuka Yoshida vs Kimiko Date Krumm H2H: 0-1
Kimiko Date Krumm holds a 1–0 lead over Yuka Yoshida in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Kimiko Date Krumm leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Kimiko Date Krumm won the 1995 Tokyo third round 6-2 6-4.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
JPN
Age 50
Right-Handed
160 cm / 5'3"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
Age 55
Right-Handed
163 cm / 5'4"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 1995* | Tokyo | WTA 500 | R32 | Hard | Kimiko Date Krumm | 6-2 6-4 | Yuka Yoshida | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yuka Yoshida | #906 | #52 | 476 | 1,625 | 39 | 64 | 37.9% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kimiko Date Krumm | — | — | — | 2,091 | 241 | 188 | 56.2% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 4 | 8 |
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 | Yuka Yoshida | Kimiko Date Krumm | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 1993 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #357 | 1,490 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 1994 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #207 | 1,501 | 0 | 0 | 1989 | 6–5 | 54.5% | — | 1,562 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1995 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #201 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 | 1990 | 10–7 | 58.8% | — | 1,664 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1996 | 7–5 | 58.3% | #102 | 1,559 | 0 | 0 | 1991 | 12–11 | 52.2% | — | 1,725 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1997 | 11–13 | 45.8% | #70 | 1,560 | 0 | 0 | 1992 | 26–13 | 66.7% | — | 1,867 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 1998 | 9–16 | 36.0% | #103 | 1,533 | 0 | 0 | 1993 | 25–11 | 69.4% | — | 1,956 | 0 | 2 |
| 23 | 1999 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #146 | 1,535 | 0 | 0 | 1994 | 32–12 | 72.7% | — | 1,987 | 0 | 4 |
| 24 | 2000 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #125 | 1,499 | 0 | 0 | 1995 | 39–12 | 76.5% | — | 2,029 | 0 | 5 |
| 25 | 2001 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #226 | 1,467 | 0 | 0 | 1996 | 31–13 | 70.5% | — | 2,071 | 0 | 7 |
| 26 | 2002 | 2–1 | 66.7% | #227 | 1,494 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 27 | 2003 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #136 | 1,496 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 2004 | 2–6 | 25.0% | #158 | 1,473 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 2005 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #286 | 1,460 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 37 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2008 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 2,042 | 0 | 7 |
| 38 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2009 | 6–11 | 35.3% | — | 1,841 | 0 | 8 |
| 39 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2010 | 19–18 | 51.4% | — | 1,814 | 0 | 8 |
| 40 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2011 | 7–24 | 22.6% | — | 1,567 | 0 | 8 |
| 41 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2012 | 2–14 | 12.5% | — | 1,454 | 0 | 8 |
| 42 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2013 | 12–15 | 44.4% | — | 1,575 | 0 | 8 |
| 43 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2014 | 11–14 | 44.0% | — | 1,597 | 0 | 8 |
| 44 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2015 | 3–6 | 33.3% | — | 1,574 | 0 | 8 |
| 46 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2017 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,564 | 0 | 8 |