H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 17:48 UTC
Annabel Croft vs Sara Gomer H2H: 1-2
Sara Gomer holds a 2–1 lead over Annabel Croft in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Annabel Croft leads 1–0 on clay, while Sara Gomer leads 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Sara Gomer won the 1985 Brisbane fourth round 6-2 7-5.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 15, 1985* | Brisbane | WTA 500 | R16 | Grass | Sara Gomer | 6-2 7-5 | Annabel Croft | Match data |
| May 8, 1982* | Solihull | WTA 250 | QF | Clay | Annabel Croft | 6-1 6-4 | Sara Gomer | Match data |
| Apr 10, 1981* | Norwich | WTA 250 | R16 | — | Sara Gomer | 6-4 4-6 8-6 | Annabel Croft | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Annabel Croft | — | — | — | 1,781 | 84 | 92 | 47.7% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Sara Gomer | #317 | #46 | 18 | 1,778 | 104 | 130 | 44.4% | 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 | Annabel Croft | Sara Gomer | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 13 | 1980 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,480 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 14 | 1981 | 9–5 | 64.3% | — | 1,549 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 15 | 1982 | 14–9 | 60.9% | — | 1,595 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 16 | 1983 | 6–7 | 46.2% | — | 1,599 | 0 | 0 | 1980 | 2–1 | 66.7% | — | 1,519 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 1984 | 11–14 | 44.0% | — | 1,617 | 0 | 0 | 1981 | 7–8 | 46.7% | — | 1,517 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 1985 | 23–20 | 53.5% | — | 1,762 | 0 | 1 | 1982 | 6–4 | 60.0% | — | 1,546 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1986 | 10–19 | 34.5% | — | 1,653 | 0 | 1 | 1983 | 3–7 | 30.0% | — | 1,533 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1987 | 8–14 | 36.4% | — | 1,574 | 0 | 1 | 1984 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #128 | 1,512 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1988 | 3–3 | 50.0% | — | 1,561 | 0 | 1 | 1985 | 10–15 | 40.0% | #101 | 1,569 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1986 | 13–14 | 48.1% | #59 | 1,660 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1987 | 18–19 | 48.6% | #72 | 1,679 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1988 | 19–15 | 55.9% | #51 | 1,744 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1989 | 7–12 | 36.8% | #124 | 1,638 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1990 | 6–8 | 42.9% | #92 | 1,635 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1991 | 8–13 | 38.1% | #120 | 1,660 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1992 | 4–9 | 30.8% | #173 | 1,577 | 0 | 1 |