H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Amanda Coetzer vs Sandra Cacic H2H: 3-0
Amanda Coetzer holds a 3–0 lead over Sandra Cacic in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Amanda Coetzer leads 2–0 on hard courts and 1–0 on carpet. Most recently, Amanda Coetzer won the 2000 US Open first round 6-2 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.
RSA
Age 54
Right-Handed
158 cm / 5'2"
H2H
3
–
0
3 main draw meetings
USA
Age 51
Right-Handed
169 cm / 5'7"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 22, 2000 | US Open | Grand Slam | R128 | Hard | Amanda Coetzer | 6-2 6-2 | Sandra Cacic | Match data |
| Nov 12, 1998* | Philadelphia | WTA 250 | R32 | Carpet | Amanda Coetzer | 6-2 6-0 | Sandra Cacic | Match data |
| Sep 2, 1998* | US Open | Grand Slam | R128 | Hard | Amanda Coetzer | 6-1 7-6 | Sandra Cacic | 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 |
| Sandra Cacic | #409 | #39 | 548 | 1,730 | 58 | 96 | 37.7% | 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 | Amanda Coetzer | Sandra Cacic | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1991 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #310 | 1,481 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 1989 | 16–13 | 55.2% | #63 | 1,675 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 1990 | 16–19 | 45.7% | #76 | 1,662 | 0 | 0 | 1993 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #76 | 1,534 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1991 | 15–19 | 44.1% | #68 | 1,686 | 0 | 0 | 1994 | 12–16 | 42.9% | #54 | 1,617 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1992 | 35–15 | 70.0% | #17 | 1,857 | 0 | 0 | 1995 | 7–12 | 36.8% | #114 | 1,602 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1993 | 42–18 | 70.0% | #15 | 1,991 | 0 | 2 | 1996 | 9–12 | 42.9% | #78 | 1,569 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 1994 | 38–19 | 66.7% | #18 | 1,885 | 0 | 3 | 1997 | 7–11 | 38.9% | #60 | 1,581 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 1995 | 31–22 | 58.5% | #19 | 1,910 | 0 | 3 | 1998 | 7–16 | 30.4% | #82 | 1,568 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 1996 | 31–20 | 60.8% | #14 | 1,863 | 0 | 3 | 1999 | 2–7 | 22.2% | #188 | 1,518 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 1997 | 60–25 | 70.6% | #4 | 2,013 | 0 | 5 | 2000 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #140 | 1,514 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 1998 | 32–23 | 58.2% | #17 | 1,887 | 0 | 6 | 2001 | 9–11 | 45.0% | #117 | 1,583 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 1999 | 37–25 | 59.7% | #11 | 1,815 | 0 | 6 | 2002 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #322 | 1,570 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2000 | 44–22 | 66.7% | #12 | 1,892 | 0 | 7 | 2003 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #395 | 1,552 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 2001 | 32–21 | 60.4% | #19 | 1,786 | 0 | 8 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 2002 | 30–22 | 57.7% | #21 | 1,795 | 0 | 8 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 2003 | 27–19 | 58.7% | #25 | 1,738 | 0 | 9 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 2004 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #286 | 1,718 | 0 | 9 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |