H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Kim Sands vs Laura Arraya H2H: 2-1
Kim Sands holds a 2–1 lead over Laura Arraya in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Kim Sands leads 2–0 on hard courts, while Laura Arraya leads 1–0 on carpet. Most recently, Kim Sands won the 1984 Mahwah second round 6-2 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.
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 15, 1984* | Mahwah | WTA 250 | R64 | Hard | Kim Sands | 6-2 6-4 | Laura Arraya | Match data |
| Jan 21, 1984* | Denver | WTA 250 | SF | Hard | Kim Sands | 6-3 6-2 | Laura Arraya | Match data |
| Sep 15, 1983* | Tokyo Queen's | WTA 250 | R32 | Carpet | Laura Arraya | 6-7 6-1 6-3 | Kim Sands | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kim Sands | — | — | — | 1,714 | 53 | 123 | 30.1% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Laura Arraya | #192 | #14 | 51 | 1,922 | 270 | 204 | 57.0% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 9 | 10 |
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 | Kim Sands | Laura Arraya | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1981 | 19–8 | 70.4% | — | 1,683 | 0 | 4 |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1982 | 33–17 | 66.0% | — | 1,741 | 0 | 7 |
| 19 | 1976 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,489 | 0 | 0 | 1983 | 23–23 | 50.0% | — | 1,713 | 0 | 7 |
| 20 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1984 | 29–18 | 61.7% | #34 | 1,760 | 0 | 8 |
| 21 | 1978 | 4–4 | 50.0% | — | 1,511 | 0 | 0 | 1985 | 17–21 | 44.7% | #63 | 1,693 | 0 | 8 |
| 22 | 1979 | 0–2 | 0.0% | — | 1,490 | 0 | 0 | 1986 | 23–24 | 48.9% | #33 | 1,718 | 0 | 8 |
| 23 | 1980 | 11–22 | 33.3% | — | 1,583 | 0 | 0 | 1987 | 16–14 | 53.3% | #45 | 1,770 | 0 | 8 |
| 24 | 1981 | 9–21 | 30.0% | — | 1,561 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 25 | 1982 | 3–16 | 15.8% | — | 1,504 | 0 | 0 | 1989 | 27–12 | 69.2% | #19 | 1,882 | 0 | 10 |
| 26 | 1983 | 12–13 | 48.0% | — | 1,623 | 0 | 0 | 1990 | 26–19 | 57.8% | #21 | 1,821 | 0 | 10 |
| 27 | 1984 | 10–23 | 30.3% | — | 1,558 | 0 | 0 | 1991 | 28–17 | 62.2% | #24 | 1,823 | 0 | 10 |
| 28 | 1985 | 3–8 | 27.3% | — | 1,546 | 0 | 0 | 1992 | 20–19 | 51.3% | #45 | 1,734 | 0 | 10 |
| 29 | 1986 | 1–10 | 9.1% | — | 1,480 | 0 | 0 | 1993 | 9–12 | 42.9% | #71 | 1,683 | 0 | 10 |
| 30 | 1987 | 0–3 | 0.0% | — | 1,456 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |