H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Lea Antonoplis vs Sara Gomer H2H: 0-1
Sara Gomer holds a 1–0 lead over Lea Antonoplis in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Sara Gomer leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Sara Gomer won the 1985 Australian Indoor third round 6-3 6-2.
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 67
Right-Handed
165 cm / 5'5"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
GBR
Age 62
Left-Handed
190 cm / 6'3"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 9, 1985* | Australian Indoor | WTA 250 | R32 | Hard | Sara Gomer | 6-3 6-2 | Lea Antonoplis | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lea Antonoplis | #599 | #66 | 6 | 1,774 | 126 | 176 | 41.7% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| 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 | Lea Antonoplis | Sara Gomer | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 14 | 1973 | 8–3 | 72.7% | — | 1,579 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 15 | 1974 | 2–5 | 28.6% | — | 1,532 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 16 | 1975 | 3–4 | 42.9% | — | 1,559 | 0 | 0 | 1980 | 2–1 | 66.7% | — | 1,519 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 1976 | 7–6 | 53.8% | — | 1,626 | 0 | 0 | 1981 | 7–8 | 46.7% | — | 1,517 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 1977 | 6–4 | 60.0% | — | 1,665 | 0 | 0 | 1982 | 6–4 | 60.0% | — | 1,546 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1978 | 17–20 | 45.9% | — | 1,717 | 0 | 0 | 1983 | 3–7 | 30.0% | — | 1,533 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1979 | 11–13 | 45.8% | — | 1,724 | 0 | 1 | 1984 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #128 | 1,512 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1980 | 14–7 | 66.7% | — | 1,735 | 0 | 2 | 1985 | 10–15 | 40.0% | #101 | 1,569 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1981 | 9–11 | 45.0% | — | 1,719 | 0 | 2 | 1986 | 13–14 | 48.1% | #59 | 1,660 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 1982 | 8–18 | 30.8% | — | 1,632 | 0 | 2 | 1987 | 18–19 | 48.6% | #72 | 1,679 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 1983 | 6–13 | 31.6% | — | 1,568 | 0 | 2 | 1988 | 19–15 | 55.9% | #51 | 1,744 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 1984 | 8–11 | 42.1% | #71 | 1,583 | 0 | 2 | 1989 | 7–12 | 36.8% | #124 | 1,638 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 1985 | 14–21 | 40.0% | #66 | 1,572 | 0 | 2 | 1990 | 6–8 | 42.9% | #92 | 1,635 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 1986 | 2–14 | 12.5% | #176 | 1,460 | 0 | 2 | 1991 | 8–13 | 38.1% | #120 | 1,660 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 1987 | 3–9 | 25.0% | #163 | 1,413 | 0 | 2 | 1992 | 4–9 | 30.8% | #173 | 1,577 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 1988 | 5–9 | 35.7% | #142 | 1,455 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 1989 | 3–7 | 30.0% | #210 | 1,448 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 1990 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #599 | 1,432 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |