H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 16:30 UTC
Zarina Diyas vs Kurumi Nara H2H: 0-1
Kurumi Nara holds a 1–0 lead over Zarina Diyas in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Kurumi Nara leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Kurumi Nara won the 2014 Washington fourth round 3-6 6-2 4-0 RET.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
KAZ
Age 32
Right-Handed
172 cm / 5'8"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
JPN
Age 34
Right-Handed
155 cm / 5'1"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 4, 2021 | Indian Wells | WTA 1000 | Q1 | Hard | Zarina Diyas | 6-4 6-3 | Kurumi Nara | Match data |
| Jul 28, 2014 | Washington | WTA 250 | R16 | Hard | Kurumi Nara | 3-6 6-2 4-0 (ret.) | Zarina Diyas | Match data |
Career Comparison
| Player | Current | Peak | Pts | Elo | W | L | Win % | GS | 1000 | Finals | 500 | 250 | Titles |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Zarina Diyas | #437 | #31 | 1,495 | 1,751 | 99 | 127 | 43.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Kurumi Nara | #246 | #32 | 1,412 | 1,700 | 82 | 116 | 41.4% | 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 | Zarina Diyas | Kurumi Nara | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 15 | 2009 | 2–1 | 66.7% | #242 | 1,527 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 16 | 2010 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #172 | 1,539 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 2011 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #227 | 1,503 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #181 | 1,512 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2012 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #264 | 1,476 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 1–7 | 12.5% | #130 | 1,474 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2013 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #163 | 1,477 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #140 | 1,456 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2014 | 20–14 | 58.8% | #33 | 1,683 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #148 | 1,437 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2015 | 20–27 | 42.6% | #52 | 1,576 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 5–6 | 45.5% | #81 | 1,506 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2016 | 8–12 | 40.0% | #150 | 1,558 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 23–21 | 52.3% | #44 | 1,649 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 2017 | 7–4 | 63.6% | #66 | 1,667 | 0 | 1 | 2015 | 19–22 | 46.3% | #81 | 1,588 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 2018 | 13–19 | 40.6% | #89 | 1,718 | 0 | 1 | 2016 | 15–18 | 45.5% | #77 | 1,595 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 2019 | 7–14 | 33.3% | #77 | 1,697 | 0 | 1 | 2017 | 10–15 | 40.0% | #102 | 1,581 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2020 | 5–6 | 45.5% | #80 | 1,655 | 0 | 1 | 2018 | 0–13 | 0.0% | #161 | 1,493 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2021 | 13–16 | 44.8% | #102 | 1,688 | 0 | 1 | 2019 | 3–3 | 50.0% | #140 | 1,569 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2022 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #1031 | 1,680 | 0 | 1 | 2020 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #160 | 1,561 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2021 | 3–2 | 60.0% | #185 | 1,514 | 0 | 1 |
| 30 | 2024 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #382 | 1,632 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |