H2H data updated: 2026-08-08 02:15 UTC
Kimiko Date vs Amanda Coetzer H2H: 1-2
Amanda Coetzer holds a 2–1 lead over Kimiko Date in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on hard courts, while Amanda Coetzer leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Kimiko Date won the 1996 Tokyo quarterfinal 6-3 6-0.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
JPN
Age 55
Right-Handed
163 cm / 5'4"
H2H
1
–
2
3 main draw meetings
RSA
Age 54
Right-Handed
158 cm / 5'2"
H2H Match Log
| Winner | Score | Loser | Match Data | Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kimiko Date | 6-3 6-0 | Amanda Coetzer | Match data | Sep 21, 1996* | Tokyo | WTA 500 | QF | Hard |
| Amanda Coetzer | 6-2 6-1 | Kimiko Date | Match data | May 25, 1994* | Roland Garros | Grand Slam | R128 | Clay |
| Amanda Coetzer | 6-3 6-2 | Kimiko Date | Match data | Sep 27, 1993* | Tokyo Nichirei | WTA 250 | F | Hard |
* 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kimiko Date | #1,191 | #4 | 1,280 | 2,091 | 245 | 190 | 56.3% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 4 | 8 |
| Amanda Coetzer | #289 | #3 | 3,380 | 2,052 | 497 | 310 | 61.6% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 7 | 9 |
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 | Kimiko Date | Amanda Coetzer | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1989 | 16–13 | 55.2% | #63 | 1,674 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 1989 | 6–5 | 54.5% | #119 | 1,563 | 0 | 0 | 1990 | 16–19 | 45.7% | #76 | 1,662 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1990 | 10–7 | 58.8% | #79 | 1,665 | 0 | 0 | 1991 | 15–19 | 44.1% | #68 | 1,685 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1991 | 12–11 | 52.2% | #32 | 1,725 | 0 | 0 | 1992 | 37–16 | 69.8% | #17 | 1,865 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1992 | 27–14 | 65.9% | #21 | 1,853 | 0 | 1 | 1993 | 42–18 | 70.0% | #15 | 1,994 | 0 | 2 |
| 22 | 1993 | 25–11 | 69.4% | #13 | 1,948 | 0 | 2 | 1994 | 38–19 | 66.7% | #18 | 1,886 | 0 | 3 |
| 23 | 1994 | 32–12 | 72.7% | #9 | 1,985 | 0 | 4 | 1995 | 31–22 | 58.5% | #19 | 1,907 | 0 | 3 |
| 24 | 1995 | 39–12 | 76.5% | #4 | 2,028 | 0 | 5 | 1996 | 32–21 | 60.4% | #14 | 1,855 | 0 | 3 |
| 25 | 1996 | 34–14 | 70.8% | #8 | 2,076 | 0 | 7 | 1997 | 60–25 | 70.6% | #4 | 2,014 | 0 | 5 |
| 26 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1998 | 32–23 | 58.2% | #17 | 1,888 | 0 | 6 |
| 27 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1999 | 37–25 | 59.7% | #11 | 1,816 | 0 | 6 |
| 28 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2000 | 47–23 | 67.1% | #12 | 1,895 | 0 | 7 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2001 | 32–21 | 60.4% | #19 | 1,786 | 0 | 8 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2002 | 30–22 | 57.7% | #21 | 1,794 | 0 | 8 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2003 | 27–19 | 58.7% | #25 | 1,738 | 0 | 9 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2004 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #286 | 1,718 | 0 | 9 |
| 37 | 2008 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #189 | 2,048 | 0 | 7 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 38 | 2009 | 6–11 | 35.3% | #69 | 1,845 | 0 | 8 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 39 | 2010 | 19–18 | 51.4% | #51 | 1,823 | 0 | 8 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 40 | 2011 | 7–24 | 22.6% | #87 | 1,570 | 0 | 8 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 41 | 2012 | 2–14 | 12.5% | #99 | 1,456 | 0 | 8 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 42 | 2013 | 12–15 | 44.4% | #75 | 1,576 | 0 | 8 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 43 | 2014 | 11–14 | 44.0% | #90 | 1,598 | 0 | 8 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 44 | 2015 | 3–6 | 33.3% | #182 | 1,574 | 0 | 8 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 46 | 2017 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #1191 | 1,564 | 0 | 8 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |