H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 17:48 UTC
Amanda Coetzer vs Maria Strandlund Tomsvik H2H: 2-0
Amanda Coetzer holds a 2–0 lead over Maria Strandlund Tomsvik in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Amanda Coetzer leads 2–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Amanda Coetzer won the 1990 Scottsdale third round 6-2 6-3.
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
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 18, 1990* | Scottsdale | WTA 250 | R32 | Hard | Amanda Coetzer | 6-2 6-3 | Maria Strandlund Tomsvik | Match data |
| Sep 15, 1989* | Phoenix | WTA 250 | R16 | Hard | Amanda Coetzer | 7-5 6-2 | Maria Strandlund Tomsvik | 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 |
| Maria Strandlund Tomsvik | — | — | — | 1,626 | 42 | 77 | 35.3% | 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 | Maria Strandlund Tomsvik | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1987 | 1–1 | 50.0% | — | 1,504 | 0 | 0 |
| 1989 | 16–13 | 55.2% | #63 | 1,675 | 0 | 0 | 1988 | 6–7 | 46.2% | — | 1,577 | 0 | 0 |
| 1990 | 16–19 | 45.7% | #76 | 1,662 | 0 | 0 | 1989 | 10–14 | 41.7% | — | 1,612 | 0 | 0 |
| 1991 | 15–19 | 44.1% | #68 | 1,686 | 0 | 0 | 1990 | 7–16 | 30.4% | — | 1,589 | 0 | 0 |
| 1992 | 35–15 | 70.0% | #17 | 1,857 | 0 | 0 | 1991 | 6–12 | 33.3% | — | 1,554 | 0 | 0 |
| 1993 | 42–18 | 70.0% | #15 | 1,991 | 0 | 2 | 1992 | 0–3 | 0.0% | — | 1,520 | 0 | 0 |
| 1994 | 38–19 | 66.7% | #18 | 1,885 | 0 | 3 | 1993 | 2–3 | 40.0% | — | 1,560 | 0 | 0 |
| 1995 | 31–22 | 58.5% | #19 | 1,910 | 0 | 3 | 1994 | 0–2 | 0.0% | — | 1,547 | 0 | 0 |
| 1996 | 31–20 | 60.8% | #14 | 1,863 | 0 | 3 | 1995 | 8–13 | 38.1% | — | 1,545 | 0 | 0 |
| 1997 | 60–25 | 70.6% | #4 | 2,013 | 0 | 5 | 1996 | 2–5 | 28.6% | — | 1,527 | 0 | 0 |
| 1998 | 32–23 | 58.2% | #17 | 1,887 | 0 | 6 | 1997 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,516 | 0 | 0 |
| 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 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |