H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Maureen Drake vs Sara Gomer H2H: 0-1
Sara Gomer holds a 1–0 lead over Maureen Drake 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 1988 Auckland third round 5-7 6-3 6-1.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
CAN
Age 55
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 28, 1988* | Auckland | WTA 250 | R32 | Hard | Sara Gomer | 5-7 6-3 6-1 | Maureen Drake | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Maureen Drake | #1,132 | #47 | 612 | 1,586 | 40 | 93 | 30.1% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 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 | Maureen Drake | Sara Gomer | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1980 | 2–1 | 66.7% | — | 1,519 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 1988 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #275 | 1,498 | 0 | 0 | 1981 | 7–8 | 46.7% | — | 1,517 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 1989 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #163 | 1,505 | 0 | 0 | 1982 | 6–4 | 60.0% | — | 1,546 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1990 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #209 | 1,464 | 0 | 0 | 1983 | 3–7 | 30.0% | — | 1,533 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1991 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #198 | 1,451 | 0 | 0 | 1984 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #128 | 1,512 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1992 | 0–5 | 0.0% | #188 | 1,412 | 0 | 0 | 1985 | 10–15 | 40.0% | #101 | 1,569 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1993 | 3–10 | 23.1% | #171 | 1,415 | 0 | 0 | 1986 | 13–14 | 48.1% | #59 | 1,660 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 1994 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #170 | 1,411 | 0 | 0 | 1987 | 18–19 | 48.6% | #72 | 1,679 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 1995 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #165 | 1,454 | 0 | 0 | 1988 | 19–15 | 55.9% | #51 | 1,744 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 1996 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #173 | 1,432 | 0 | 0 | 1989 | 7–12 | 36.8% | #124 | 1,638 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 1997 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #159 | 1,423 | 0 | 0 | 1990 | 6–8 | 42.9% | #92 | 1,635 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 1998 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #130 | 1,412 | 0 | 0 | 1991 | 8–13 | 38.1% | #120 | 1,660 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 1999 | 12–15 | 44.4% | #57 | 1,554 | 0 | 0 | 1992 | 4–9 | 30.8% | #173 | 1,577 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 2000 | 5–12 | 29.4% | #147 | 1,502 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 2001 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #161 | 1,493 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 2002 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #99 | 1,519 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 2003 | 3–8 | 27.3% | #115 | 1,500 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 2004 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #191 | 1,461 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 34 | 2005 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #278 | 1,467 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |