H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Amanda Coetzer vs Maureen Drake H2H: 4-0
Amanda Coetzer holds a 4–0 lead over Maureen Drake in their WTA head-to-head. Across 4 main-draw meetings, Amanda Coetzer leads 3–0 on hard courts and 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Amanda Coetzer won the 2000 Roland Garros first round 6-0 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
4
–
0
4 main draw meetings
CAN
Age 55
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 31, 2000* | Roland Garros | Grand Slam | R128 | Clay | Amanda Coetzer | 6-0 6-4 | Maureen Drake | Match data |
| Sep 24, 1999* | Tokyo | WTA 500 | R16 | Hard | Amanda Coetzer | 4-6 6-3 6-4 | Maureen Drake | Match data |
| Mar 21, 1999* | Key Biscayne | WTA 1000 | R32 | Hard | Amanda Coetzer | 6-4 6-4 | Maureen Drake | Match data |
| Feb 24, 1996* | Oklahoma | WTA 250 | R16 | Hard | Amanda Coetzer | 6-4 3-6 6-1 | Maureen Drake | 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 |
| Maureen Drake | #1,132 | #47 | 612 | 1,586 | 40 | 93 | 30.1% | 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 | Maureen Drake | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | 1988 | 3–2 | 60.0% | #152 | 1,536 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 1989 | 16–13 | 55.2% | #63 | 1,675 | 0 | 0 | 1988 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #275 | 1,498 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 1990 | 16–19 | 45.7% | #76 | 1,662 | 0 | 0 | 1989 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #163 | 1,505 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1991 | 15–19 | 44.1% | #68 | 1,686 | 0 | 0 | 1990 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #209 | 1,464 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1992 | 35–15 | 70.0% | #17 | 1,857 | 0 | 0 | 1991 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #198 | 1,451 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1993 | 42–18 | 70.0% | #15 | 1,991 | 0 | 2 | 1992 | 0–5 | 0.0% | #188 | 1,412 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1994 | 38–19 | 66.7% | #18 | 1,885 | 0 | 3 | 1993 | 3–10 | 23.1% | #171 | 1,415 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 1995 | 31–22 | 58.5% | #19 | 1,910 | 0 | 3 | 1994 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #170 | 1,411 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 1996 | 31–20 | 60.8% | #14 | 1,863 | 0 | 3 | 1995 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #165 | 1,454 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 1997 | 60–25 | 70.6% | #4 | 2,013 | 0 | 5 | 1996 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #173 | 1,432 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 1998 | 32–23 | 58.2% | #17 | 1,887 | 0 | 6 | 1997 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #159 | 1,423 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 1999 | 37–25 | 59.7% | #11 | 1,815 | 0 | 6 | 1998 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #130 | 1,412 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2000 | 44–22 | 66.7% | #12 | 1,892 | 0 | 7 | 1999 | 12–15 | 44.4% | #57 | 1,554 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2001 | 32–21 | 60.4% | #19 | 1,786 | 0 | 8 | 2000 | 5–12 | 29.4% | #147 | 1,502 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2002 | 30–22 | 57.7% | #21 | 1,795 | 0 | 8 | 2001 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #161 | 1,493 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | 2003 | 27–19 | 58.7% | #25 | 1,738 | 0 | 9 | 2002 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #99 | 1,519 | 0 | 0 |
| 32 | 2004 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #286 | 1,718 | 0 | 9 | 2003 | 3–8 | 27.3% | #115 | 1,500 | 0 | 0 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2004 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #191 | 1,461 | 0 | 0 |
| 34 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2005 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #278 | 1,467 | 0 | 0 |