H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Mirjana Lucic-Baroni vs Amanda Coetzer H2H: 1-2
Amanda Coetzer holds a 2–1 lead over Mirjana Lucic-Baroni in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Amanda Coetzer leads 2–0 on hard courts, while Mirjana Lucic-Baroni leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Amanda Coetzer won the 1999 Canadian Open fourth round 4-6 7-6 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.
CRO
Age 44
Right-Handed
181 cm / 5'11"
H2H
1
–
2
3 main draw meetings
RSA
Age 54
Right-Handed
158 cm / 5'2"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 20, 1999* | Canadian Open | WTA 1000 | R16 | Hard | Amanda Coetzer | 4-6 7-6 6-2 | Mirjana Lucic-Baroni | Match data |
| Jan 14, 1999* | Sydney | WTA 500 | R32 | Hard | Amanda Coetzer | 6-4 3-6 6-0 | Mirjana Lucic-Baroni | Match data |
| May 3, 1997* | Bol | WTA 250 | SF | Clay | Mirjana Lucic-Baroni | 6-4 6-3 | Amanda Coetzer | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mirjana Lucic-Baroni | #424 | #20 | 1,924 | 1,798 | 136 | 166 | 45.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
| Amanda Coetzer | #289 | #3 | 3,380 | 2,051 | 491 | 307 | 61.5% | 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 | Mirjana Lucic-Baroni | Amanda Coetzer | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 15 | 1997 | 11–3 | 78.6% | #49 | 1,692 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 16 | 1998 | 15–11 | 57.7% | #51 | 1,776 | 0 | 2 | 1988 | 3–2 | 60.0% | #152 | 1,536 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 1999 | 11–13 | 45.8% | #48 | 1,757 | 0 | 2 | 1989 | 16–13 | 55.2% | #63 | 1,675 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2000 | 2–12 | 14.3% | #202 | 1,601 | 0 | 2 | 1990 | 16–19 | 45.7% | #76 | 1,662 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2001 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #192 | 1,596 | 0 | 2 | 1991 | 15–19 | 44.1% | #68 | 1,686 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2002 | 1–6 | 14.3% | #203 | 1,546 | 0 | 2 | 1992 | 35–15 | 70.0% | #17 | 1,857 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2003 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #348 | 1,526 | 0 | 2 | 1993 | 42–18 | 70.0% | #15 | 1,991 | 0 | 2 |
| 22 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1994 | 38–19 | 66.7% | #18 | 1,885 | 0 | 3 |
| 23 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1995 | 31–22 | 58.5% | #19 | 1,910 | 0 | 3 |
| 24 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1996 | 31–20 | 60.8% | #14 | 1,863 | 0 | 3 |
| 25 | 2007 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #455 | 1,538 | 0 | 2 | 1997 | 60–25 | 70.6% | #4 | 2,013 | 0 | 5 |
| 26 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1998 | 32–23 | 58.2% | #17 | 1,887 | 0 | 6 |
| 27 | 2009 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #258 | 1,519 | 0 | 2 | 1999 | 37–25 | 59.7% | #11 | 1,815 | 0 | 6 |
| 28 | 2010 | 5–6 | 45.5% | #96 | 1,554 | 0 | 2 | 2000 | 44–22 | 66.7% | #12 | 1,892 | 0 | 7 |
| 29 | 2011 | 8–14 | 36.4% | #129 | 1,551 | 0 | 2 | 2001 | 32–21 | 60.4% | #19 | 1,786 | 0 | 8 |
| 30 | 2012 | 7–12 | 36.8% | #105 | 1,535 | 0 | 2 | 2002 | 30–22 | 57.7% | #21 | 1,795 | 0 | 8 |
| 31 | 2013 | 8–11 | 42.1% | #110 | 1,563 | 0 | 2 | 2003 | 27–19 | 58.7% | #25 | 1,738 | 0 | 9 |
| 32 | 2014 | 12–8 | 60.0% | #60 | 1,706 | 0 | 3 | 2004 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #286 | 1,718 | 0 | 9 |
| 33 | 2015 | 17–26 | 39.5% | #68 | 1,657 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 34 | 2016 | 14–18 | 43.8% | #80 | 1,629 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 35 | 2017 | 20–16 | 55.6% | #32 | 1,698 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 36 | 2018 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #327 | 1,689 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |