H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Amanda Coetzer vs Fang Li H2H: 2-0
Amanda Coetzer holds a 2–0 lead over Fang Li in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Amanda Coetzer leads 1–0 on clay and 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Amanda Coetzer won the 1998 Canadian Open third round 6-3 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.
RSA
Age 54
Right-Handed
158 cm / 5'2"
H2H
2
–
0
2 main draw meetings
CHN
Right-Handed
166 cm / 5'5"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 20, 1998* | Canadian Open | WTA 1000 | R32 | Hard | Amanda Coetzer | 6-3 6-4 | Fang Li | Match data |
| May 22, 1998* | Strasbourg | WTA 500 | R16 | Clay | Amanda Coetzer | 7-6 7-5 | Fang Li | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Amanda Coetzer | #289 | #3 | 3,380 | 2,051 | 491 | 307 | 61.5% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 7 | 9 |
| Fang Li | #488 | #36 | 723 | 1,705 | 67 | 89 | 42.9% | 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.
| Amanda Coetzer | Fang Li | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles |
| 1988 | 3–2 | 60.0% | #152 | 1,536 | 0 | 0 | 1992 | 5–7 | 41.7% | #119 | 1,547 | 0 | 0 |
| 1989 | 16–13 | 55.2% | #63 | 1,675 | 0 | 0 | 1993 | 6–12 | 33.3% | #132 | 1,531 | 0 | 0 |
| 1990 | 16–19 | 45.7% | #76 | 1,662 | 0 | 0 | 1994 | 13–13 | 50.0% | #67 | 1,609 | 0 | 0 |
| 1991 | 15–19 | 44.1% | #68 | 1,686 | 0 | 0 | 1995 | 9–8 | 52.9% | #93 | 1,613 | 0 | 0 |
| 1992 | 35–15 | 70.0% | #17 | 1,857 | 0 | 0 | 1996 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #199 | 1,585 | 0 | 0 |
| 1993 | 42–18 | 70.0% | #15 | 1,991 | 0 | 2 | 1997 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #69 | 1,594 | 0 | 0 |
| 1994 | 38–19 | 66.7% | #18 | 1,885 | 0 | 3 | 1998 | 23–24 | 48.9% | #40 | 1,676 | 0 | 0 |
| 1995 | 31–22 | 58.5% | #19 | 1,910 | 0 | 3 | 1999 | 6–12 | 33.3% | #86 | 1,585 | 0 | 0 |
| 1996 | 31–20 | 60.8% | #14 | 1,863 | 0 | 3 | 2000 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #503 | 1,541 | 0 | 0 |
| 1997 | 60–25 | 70.6% | #4 | 2,013 | 0 | 5 | 2001 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #488 | 1,500 | 0 | 0 |
| 1998 | 32–23 | 58.2% | #17 | 1,887 | 0 | 6 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 1999 | 37–25 | 59.7% | #11 | 1,815 | 0 | 6 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2000 | 44–22 | 66.7% | #12 | 1,892 | 0 | 7 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2001 | 32–21 | 60.4% | #19 | 1,786 | 0 | 8 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2002 | 30–22 | 57.7% | #21 | 1,795 | 0 | 8 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2003 | 27–19 | 58.7% | #25 | 1,738 | 0 | 9 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2004 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #286 | 1,718 | 0 | 9 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |