H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Meilen Tu vs Sandra Cacic H2H: 0-1
Sandra Cacic holds a 1–0 lead over Meilen Tu in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Sandra Cacic leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Sandra Cacic won the 2001 Miami first round 7-5 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.
USA
Age 48
Right-Handed
163 cm / 5'4"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
USA
Age 51
Right-Handed
169 cm / 5'7"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 22, 2001* | Miami | WTA 1000 | R128 | Hard | Sandra Cacic | 7-5 6-4 | Meilen Tu | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Meilen Tu | #1,136 | #35 | 769 | 1,692 | 103 | 163 | 38.7% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Sandra Cacic | #409 | #39 | 548 | 1,730 | 58 | 96 | 37.7% | 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 | Meilen Tu | Sandra Cacic | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | 1994 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #160 | 1,542 | 0 | 0 | 1991 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #310 | 1,481 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 1995 | 3–10 | 23.1% | #161 | 1,506 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 1996 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #157 | 1,518 | 0 | 0 | 1993 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #76 | 1,534 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1997 | 6–13 | 31.6% | #81 | 1,519 | 0 | 0 | 1994 | 12–16 | 42.9% | #54 | 1,617 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1998 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #209 | 1,533 | 0 | 0 | 1995 | 7–12 | 36.8% | #114 | 1,602 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1999 | 3–11 | 21.4% | #103 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 | 1996 | 9–12 | 42.9% | #78 | 1,569 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 2000 | 6–9 | 40.0% | #67 | 1,576 | 0 | 0 | 1997 | 7–11 | 38.9% | #60 | 1,581 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 2001 | 25–23 | 52.1% | #45 | 1,615 | 0 | 1 | 1998 | 7–16 | 30.4% | #82 | 1,568 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 2002 | 16–24 | 40.0% | #73 | 1,561 | 0 | 1 | 1999 | 2–7 | 22.2% | #188 | 1,518 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 2003 | 4–14 | 22.2% | #143 | 1,478 | 0 | 1 | 2000 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #140 | 1,514 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2004 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #162 | 1,464 | 0 | 1 | 2001 | 9–11 | 45.0% | #117 | 1,583 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2005 | 4–9 | 30.8% | #120 | 1,474 | 0 | 1 | 2002 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #322 | 1,570 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2006 | 7–9 | 43.8% | #90 | 1,532 | 0 | 1 | 2003 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #395 | 1,552 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 2007 | 20–22 | 47.6% | #47 | 1,625 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 2008 | 1–6 | 14.3% | #630 | 1,546 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |