H2H data updated: 2026-09-14 00:00 UTC

Amanda Coetzer vs Lilia Osterloh H2H: 1-1

Amanda Coetzer and Lilia Osterloh are tied 1–1 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Amanda Coetzer leads 1–0 on clay, while Lilia Osterloh leads 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Lilia Osterloh won the 2000 Wimbledon second round 7-6(0) 6-2.

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

Amanda Coetzer
RSA Age 54 Right-Handed 158 cm / 5'2"
H2H
1 – 1
2 main-draw meetings
Lilia Osterloh
USA Age 48 Right-Handed 170 cm / 5'7"

H2H Match Log

PlayerScorePlayerMatch DataDateRoundTournamentCategorySurface
Lilia Osterloh #77 7-6(0) 6-2 Amanda Coetzer #12 Match data Jun 29, 2000* R64 Wimbledon Grand Slam Grass
Amanda Coetzer #13 6-4 6-2 Lilia Osterloh #70 Match data Apr 8, 1999* R32 Amelia Island Tier II → modern equivalent WTA 500 Clay

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
Amanda Coetzer #289 #3 3,380 2,052 497 310 61.6% 0 1 0 1 7 9
Lilia Osterloh #1,223 #41 738 1,696 83 138 37.6% 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 Amanda Coetzer Lilia Osterloh
YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles
16 1988 3–2 60.0% #152 1,536 0 0 — — — — — — —
17 1989 16–13 55.2% #63 1,674 0 0 — — — — — — —
18 1990 16–19 45.7% #76 1,662 0 0 1996 1–1 50.0% #195 1,518 0 0
19 1991 15–19 44.1% #68 1,685 0 0 1997 2–2 50.0% #170 1,550 0 0
20 1992 37–16 69.8% #17 1,865 0 0 1998 0–5 0.0% #120 1,501 0 0
21 1993 42–18 70.0% #15 1,994 0 2 1999 9–13 40.9% #79 1,545 0 0
22 1994 38–19 66.7% #18 1,886 0 3 2000 15–19 44.1% #43 1,596 0 0
23 1995 31–22 58.5% #19 1,907 0 3 2001 23–25 47.9% #53 1,658 0 0
24 1996 32–21 60.4% #14 1,855 0 3 2002 7–18 28.0% #156 1,535 0 0
25 1997 60–25 70.6% #4 2,014 0 5 2003 0–2 0.0% #180 1,508 0 0
26 1998 32–23 58.2% #17 1,888 0 6 2004 4–5 44.4% #119 1,561 0 0
27 1999 37–25 59.7% #11 1,816 0 6 2005 2–9 18.2% #144 1,488 0 0
28 2000 47–23 67.1% #12 1,894 0 7 2006 6–8 42.9% #118 1,509 0 0
29 2001 32–21 60.4% #19 1,786 0 8 2007 7–12 36.8% #91 1,544 0 0
30 2002 30–22 57.7% #21 1,794 0 8 2008 3–10 23.1% #230 1,486 0 0
31 2003 27–19 58.7% #25 1,738 0 9 2009 3–3 50.0% #136 1,510 0 0
32 2004 2–3 40.0% #286 1,718 0 9 2010 1–6 14.3% #237 1,467 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 Amanda Coetzer Lilia Osterloh
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 %
16 1988 1 1 2 50.0% 2 1 3 66.7% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
17 1989 7 5 12 58.3% 8 6 14 57.1% 1 2 3 33.3% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
18 1990 11 11 22 50.0% 4 5 9 44.4% 1 2 3 33.3% 0 1 1 0.0% 1996 1 1 2 50.0% — — — — — — — — — — — —
19 1991 9 11 20 45.0% 5 6 11 45.5% 1 2 3 33.3% — — — — 1997 2 1 3 66.7% — — — — — — — — 0 1 1 0.0%
20 1992 20 8 28 71.4% 16 7 23 69.6% — — — — 1 1 2 50.0% 1998 0 3 3 0.0% 0 1 1 0.0% 0 1 1 0.0% — — — —
21 1993 25 8 33 75.8% 11 5 16 68.8% 2 2 4 50.0% 4 3 7 57.1% 1999 6 8 14 42.9% 2 3 5 40.0% 1 2 3 33.3% — — — —
22 1994 21 11 32 65.6% 12 4 16 75.0% 3 1 4 75.0% 2 3 5 40.0% 2000 6 9 15 40.0% 2 5 7 28.6% 5 2 7 71.4% 2 3 5 40.0%
23 1995 14 11 25 56.0% 10 6 16 62.5% 1 1 2 50.0% 6 4 10 60.0% 2001 14 13 27 51.9% 4 6 10 40.0% 2 3 5 40.0% 3 3 6 50.0%
24 1996 25 12 37 67.6% 6 4 10 60.0% 1 1 2 50.0% 0 4 4 0.0% 2002 6 8 14 42.9% 0 7 7 0.0% 1 2 3 33.3% 0 1 1 0.0%
25 1997 22 13 35 62.9% 27 7 34 79.4% 1 1 2 50.0% 10 4 14 71.4% 2003 — — — — — — — — 0 2 2 0.0% — — — —
26 1998 16 11 27 59.3% 10 5 15 66.7% 1 2 3 33.3% 5 5 10 50.0% 2004 4 5 9 44.4% — — — — — — — — — — — —
27 1999 23 14 37 62.2% 6 6 12 50.0% 4 2 6 66.7% 4 3 7 57.1% 2005 0 3 3 0.0% 2 4 6 33.3% 0 1 1 0.0% 0 1 1 0.0%
28 2000 19 12 31 61.3% 19 5 24 79.2% 2 2 4 50.0% 7 4 11 63.6% 2006 6 6 12 50.0% — — — — 0 2 2 0.0% — — — —
29 2001 13 11 24 54.2% 16 6 22 72.7% 2 2 4 50.0% 1 2 3 33.3% 2007 5 9 14 35.7% 1 1 2 50.0% 1 1 2 50.0% 0 1 1 0.0%
30 2002 20 13 33 60.6% 5 5 10 50.0% 1 2 3 33.3% 4 2 6 66.7% 2008 3 5 8 37.5% 0 5 5 0.0% — — — — — — — —
31 2003 17 11 28 60.7% 8 4 12 66.7% 2 2 4 50.0% 0 2 2 0.0% 2009 2 2 4 50.0% — — — — 1 1 2 50.0% — — — —
32 2004 2 2 4 50.0% 0 1 1 0.0% — — — — — — — — 2010 1 3 4 25.0% 0 2 2 0.0% 0 1 1 0.0% — — — —
Career — 265 165 430 61.6% 165 83 248 66.5% 23 24 47 48.9% 44 38 82 53.7% — 56 76 132 42.4% 11 34 45 24.4% 11 18 29 37.9% 5 10 15 33.3%

Performance Progression by Age

Seasons are aligned by the age each player spent most of that calendar year. Detailed serve and return statistics available for 7/51 of Amanda Coetzer's and 52/70 of Lilia Osterloh's main draw matches. Sample is shown as matches with detailed serve and return statistics / total main draw matches. Bold green marks the stronger value when both stat samples contain at least 5 matches; lower is better for DFs/M.

Age Amanda Coetzer Lilia Osterloh
Yr Sample Aces/M DFs/M 1st Sv% 1st Pts% 2nd Pts% BP Saved% BP Conv% Svc Pts% Ret Pts% Yr Sample Aces/M DFs/M 1st Sv% 1st Pts% 2nd Pts% BP Saved% BP Conv% Svc Pts% Ret Pts%
27 — —/— — — — — — — — — — 2005 3/11 0.3 4.3 60.5% 46.3% 46.2% 38.9% 66.7% 46.9% 37.3%
28 — —/— — — — — — — — — — 2006 7/14 0.9 3.6 66.1% 56.0% 39.1% 42.7% 47.9% 49.6% 46.1%
29 — —/— — — — — — — — — — 2007 17/19 1.8 3.6 60.1% 54.8% 45.0% 46.6% 44.5% 50.6% 43.6%
30 — —/— — — — — — — — — — 2008 12/13 1.3 4.6 58.3% 60.2% 37.4% 55.9% 42.2% 50.7% 42.9%
31 2003 5/46 0.6 2.6 67.1% 60.3% 44.8% 58.0% 41.1% 55.6% 43.5% 2009 6/6 2.2 2.7 62.8% 60.1% 48.3% 55.1% 59.7% 56.1% 39.6%
32 2004 2/5 0.0 1.0 71.5% 51.7% 48.7% 53.3% 75.0% 50.9% 54.3% 2010 7/7 2.9 3.0 61.3% 57.0% 39.1% 47.3% 54.5% 50.0% 37.0%
Career — 7/807 0.4 2.1 68.3% 57.8% 45.9% 56.7% 50.8% 54.2% 46.6% — 52/221 1.7 3.7 61.0% 56.6% 42.1% 48.9% 48.8% 50.8% 42.1%

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 Amanda Coetzer Lilia Osterloh
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
16 1988 1537 112.0 — — — — — +42 — 63.6% +0.55 0–1 — — +0.21 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
17 1989 1674 132.8 — — — — -18 -17 -126 56.3% +0.50 2–4 (33%) 2–1 (67%) 99.4 -0.21 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
18 1990 1662 126.6 — — — — +9 -10 -107 44.4% -0.53 7–4 (64%) 1–4 (20%) 102.4 -1.00 1996 1519 110.9 — — — — — — — 50.0% +0.50 — — — -0.06
19 1991 1685 139.7 — — — — -8 -8 -103 44.6% -0.51 3–5 (38%) 3–1 (75%) 99.5 -1.77 1997 1551 112.0 — — — — +33 — — 28.6% -2.00 1–0 — — +0.04
20 1992 1865 153.9 — — — — -32 +16 — 64.1% +1.07 10–5 (67%) 2–3 (40%) 103.2 +0.99 1998 1502 105.3 — — — — +38 — — 23.1% -1.85 0–3 (0%) 0–1 — +0.07
21 1993 1994 160.0 — — — — +10 -32 -406 65.4% +0.99 9–5 (64%) 4–10 (29%) 99.0 +1.59 1999 1546 126.1 — — — — +29 +17 +5 40.0% -0.98 4–2 (67%) — — -0.06
22 1994 1886 153.6 — — — — -4 +95 -255 65.1% +1.19 7–8 (47%) 5–4 (56%) 95.9 +1.72 2000 1596 120.7 — — — — -34 -49 +61 42.5% -0.41 8–6 (57%) 3–8 (27%) 101.9 -0.05
23 1995 1907 160.6 — — — — 0 +74 — 53.3% +0.22 13–7 (65%) 4–3 (57%) 103.6 -2.38 2001 1658 133.0 — — — — -4 -132 +27 49.5% -0.09 5–8 (38%) 7–4 (64%) 100.9 -0.27
24 1996 1856 161.7 — — — — +2 +111 — 60.2% +0.94 5–7 (42%) 5–5 (50%) 95.1 -0.79 2002 1535 110.8 — — — — +102 -112 +96 29.3% -1.59 5–3 (63%) 2–3 (40%) 102.7 -1.31
25 1997 2014 167.3 — — — — -43 +103 — 64.8% +1.14 18–7 (72%) 10–7 (59%) 107.6 +0.54 2003 1509 94.9 — — — — — — — 0.0% -2.75 — — — +0.04
26 1998 1888 157.3 — — — — +20 +176 -212 56.7% +0.43 9–10 (47%) 6–4 (60%) 95.1 +0.82 2004 1561 130.0 — — — — +95 — — 47.6% -0.38 1–2 (33%) 1–1 — -0.58
27 1999 1816 156.1 — — — — +61 +90 -116 53.8% +0.19 16–7 (70%) 7–7 (50%) 101.8 +0.50 2005 1488 99.5 -2.44 -2.36 0.703 41.7% +105 -60 — 28.0% -2.08 0–3 (0%) 0–1 — -0.27
28 2000 1895 157.2 — — — — -11 +100 -198 65.4% +1.19 8–10 (44%) 9–5 (64%) 97.8 +0.42 2006 1510 110.3 -2.68 -0.13 0.914 47.9% +82 — — 46.9% -0.19 3–3 (50%) 1–4 (20%) 98.8 +0.94
29 2001 1786 143.1 — — — — -8 +200 -64 56.5% +0.63 12–8 (60%) 7–5 (58%) 99.6 +2.01 2007 1545 117.7 -3.39 +0.08 0.882 46.8% +27 — — 41.9% -0.91 1–4 (20%) 1–0 — -0.55
30 2002 1795 147.3 — — — — +44 +76 -128 57.0% +0.36 7–5 (58%) 4–3 (57%) 102.2 +1.05 2008 1486 100.1 -3.07 -1.01 0.871 46.7% +64 -97 — 24.0% -1.44 1–0 1–3 (25%) — +0.06
31 2003 1739 139.6 +0.81 +0.45 0.979 49.4% +19 +138 -49 54.6% +0.36 11–5 (69%) 4–5 (44%) 101.8 +0.51 2009 1511 100.3 -0.43 -1.46 0.901 48.5% +43 — — 40.0% -0.40 3–0 (100%) 0–1 — +0.33
32 2004 1718 114.7 -0.37 +1.49 1.105 52.2% +32 — — 36.4% -0.36 1–0 — — -0.28 2010 1468 100.5 -2.57 -3.96 0.740 43.5% +60 — — 18.8% -2.19 1–1 0–1 — -0.29
Career — 2052 159.5 +0.47 +0.75 1.018 50.2% +4 +80 -161 58.5% +0.63 138–98 (58%) 73–67 (52%) 100.2 +0.49 — 1696 123.9 -2.71 -1.06 0.855 46.4% +34 -80 +48 39.2% -0.82 33–35 (49%) 16–27 (37%) 99.8 -0.89

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.