H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Chanda Rubin vs Sarah Pitkowski-Malcor H2H: 4-0
Chanda Rubin holds a 4–0 lead over Sarah Pitkowski-Malcor in their WTA head-to-head. Across 4 main-draw meetings, Chanda Rubin leads 2–0 on hard courts and 1–0 on carpet. Most recently, Chanda Rubin won the 2000 Eastbourne third round 7-5 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.
USA
Age 50
Right-Handed
168 cm / 5'6"
H2H
4
–
0
4 main draw meetings
FRA
Age 50
Right-Handed
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 22, 2000* | Eastbourne | WTA 500 | R32 | Grass | Chanda Rubin | 7-5 6-3 | Sarah Pitkowski-Malcor | Match data |
| Aug 18, 1999* | Canadian Open | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard | Chanda Rubin | 6-2 6-3 | Sarah Pitkowski-Malcor | Match data |
| Jan 16, 1999* | Hobart | WTA 250 | QF | Hard | Chanda Rubin | 4-6 6-1 6-4 | Sarah Pitkowski-Malcor | Match data |
| Oct 23, 1997* | Quebec City | WTA 250 | R32 | Carpet | Chanda Rubin | 7-5 6-7 7-5 | Sarah Pitkowski-Malcor | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chanda Rubin | #1,122 | #6 | 2,554 | 2,047 | 343 | 231 | 59.8% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 5 | 1 | 7 |
| Sarah Pitkowski-Malcor | #739 | #29 | 917 | 1,771 | 109 | 123 | 47.0% | 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 | Chanda Rubin | Sarah Pitkowski-Malcor | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 14 | 1990 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #526 | 1,489 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 15 | 1991 | 8–6 | 57.1% | #84 | 1,583 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 16 | 1992 | 10–15 | 40.0% | #84 | 1,617 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 1993 | 15–17 | 46.9% | #70 | 1,653 | 0 | 0 | 1993 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #167 | 1,500 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 1994 | 28–17 | 62.2% | #23 | 1,804 | 0 | 0 | 1994 | 2–5 | 28.6% | #122 | 1,501 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1995 | 38–19 | 66.7% | #15 | 1,945 | 0 | 0 | 1995 | 7–12 | 36.8% | #94 | 1,499 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1996 | 20–9 | 69.0% | #17 | 1,989 | 0 | 0 | 1996 | 12–12 | 50.0% | #85 | 1,605 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1997 | 23–20 | 53.5% | #32 | 1,814 | 0 | 1 | 1997 | 14–17 | 45.2% | #57 | 1,621 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1998 | 20–19 | 51.3% | #35 | 1,800 | 0 | 1 | 1998 | 21–21 | 50.0% | #33 | 1,724 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 1999 | 33–20 | 62.3% | #22 | 1,843 | 0 | 2 | 1999 | 28–21 | 57.1% | #36 | 1,708 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 2000 | 42–22 | 65.6% | #13 | 1,910 | 0 | 3 | 2000 | 19–19 | 50.0% | #65 | 1,669 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 2001 | 16–16 | 50.0% | #52 | 1,806 | 0 | 3 | 2001 | 5–13 | 27.8% | #160 | 1,575 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2002 | 29–11 | 72.5% | #13 | 1,958 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 27 | 2003 | 43–20 | 68.3% | #9 | 1,917 | 0 | 7 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 2004 | 16–10 | 61.5% | #52 | 1,860 | 0 | 7 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 2005 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #545 | 1,823 | 0 | 7 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 2006 | 1–7 | 12.5% | #486 | 1,719 | 0 | 7 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |