H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Coco Vandeweghe vs Sabine Lisicki H2H: 1-3
Sabine Lisicki holds a 3–1 lead over Coco Vandeweghe in their WTA head-to-head. Across 4 main-draw meetings, Sabine Lisicki leads 3–0 on hard courts, while Coco Vandeweghe leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Coco Vandeweghe won the 2015 Madrid second round 7-6(3) 3-6 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.
USA
Age 34
Right-Handed
185 cm / 6'1"
H2H
1
–
3
4 main draw meetings
GER
Age 36
Right-Handed
178 cm / 5'10"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 6, 2015* | Madrid | WTA 1000 | R64 | Clay | Coco Vandeweghe | 7-6(3) 3-6 7-5 | Sabine Lisicki | Match data |
| Aug 5, 2011* | San Diego | WTA 500 | R16 | Hard | Sabine Lisicki | 6-4 6-3 | Coco Vandeweghe | Match data |
| Sep 1, 2010* | US Open | Grand Slam | R128 | Hard | Sabine Lisicki | 6-1 6-0 | Coco Vandeweghe | Match data |
| Mar 25, 2008* | Miami | WTA 1000 | R128 | Hard | Sabine Lisicki | 6-4 7-5 | Coco Vandeweghe | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coco Vandeweghe | #815 | #9 | 3,258 | 1,877 | 138 | 151 | 47.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| Sabine Lisicki | #502 | #12 | 3,251 | 1,940 | 206 | 172 | 54.5% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 4 |
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 | Coco Vandeweghe | Sabine Lisicki | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 14 | 2006 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,484 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 15 | 2007 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #549 | 1,479 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 16 | 2008 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #476 | 1,453 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #444 | 1,489 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 2009 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #322 | 1,465 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #198 | 1,475 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2010 | 6–6 | 50.0% | #116 | 1,566 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 16–18 | 47.1% | #57 | 1,606 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2011 | 8–13 | 38.1% | #122 | 1,544 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 29–17 | 63.0% | #22 | 1,792 | 0 | 1 |
| 20 | 2012 | 6–7 | 46.2% | #97 | 1,606 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 4–9 | 30.8% | #175 | 1,658 | 0 | 1 |
| 21 | 2013 | 5–11 | 31.2% | #113 | 1,563 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 35–13 | 72.9% | #15 | 1,872 | 0 | 3 |
| 22 | 2014 | 22–14 | 61.1% | #39 | 1,731 | 0 | 1 | 2012 | 15–18 | 45.5% | #37 | 1,707 | 0 | 3 |
| 23 | 2015 | 20–21 | 48.8% | #37 | 1,726 | 0 | 1 | 2013 | 34–19 | 64.2% | #15 | 1,824 | 0 | 3 |
| 24 | 2016 | 22–17 | 56.4% | #36 | 1,726 | 0 | 2 | 2014 | 27–21 | 56.2% | #26 | 1,798 | 0 | 4 |
| 25 | 2017 | 29–18 | 61.7% | #10 | 1,856 | 0 | 2 | 2015 | 22–19 | 53.7% | #32 | 1,791 | 0 | 4 |
| 26 | 2018 | 9–16 | 36.0% | #100 | 1,688 | 0 | 2 | 2016 | 14–19 | 42.4% | #93 | 1,647 | 0 | 4 |
| 27 | 2019 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #241 | 1,688 | 0 | 2 | 2017 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #220 | 1,636 | 0 | 4 |
| 28 | 2020 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #214 | 1,624 | 0 | 2 | 2018 | 5–4 | 55.6% | #199 | 1,549 | 0 | 4 |
| 29 | 2021 | 4–9 | 30.8% | #174 | 1,592 | 0 | 2 | 2019 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #562 | 1,479 | 0 | 4 |
| 30 | 2022 | 4–5 | 44.4% | #128 | 1,666 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 2023 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #420 | 1,533 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2022 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #342 | 1,575 | 0 | 4 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2023 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #311 | 1,569 | 0 | 4 |