H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Sandra Cacic vs Ann Grossman H2H: 1-2
Ann Grossman holds a 2–1 lead over Sandra Cacic in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Ann Grossman leads 1–0 on carpet and 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Sandra Cacic won the 1997 Stanford third round 6-2 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 51
Right-Handed
169 cm / 5'7"
H2H
1
–
2
3 main draw meetings
USA
Age 55
Right-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 24, 1997* | Stanford | WTA 250 | R32 | Hard | Sandra Cacic | 6-2 6-2 | Ann Grossman | Match data |
| May 11, 1994* | Berlin | WTA 1000 | R64 | Clay | Ann Grossman | 6-3 6-4 | Sandra Cacic | Match data |
| Nov 4, 1993* | Oakland | WTA 250 | R32 | Carpet | Ann Grossman | 6-4 6-1 | Sandra Cacic | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sandra Cacic | #409 | #39 | 548 | 1,730 | 58 | 96 | 37.7% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Ann Grossman | #343 | #29 | 384 | 1,888 | 187 | 185 | 50.3% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
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 | Sandra Cacic | Ann Grossman | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | 1991 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #310 | 1,481 | 0 | 0 | 1987 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #378 | 1,497 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1988 | 15–12 | 55.6% | #48 | 1,699 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 1993 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #76 | 1,534 | 0 | 0 | 1989 | 23–20 | 53.5% | #54 | 1,736 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1994 | 12–16 | 42.9% | #54 | 1,617 | 0 | 0 | 1990 | 23–22 | 51.1% | #50 | 1,749 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1995 | 7–12 | 36.8% | #114 | 1,602 | 0 | 0 | 1991 | 12–19 | 38.7% | #89 | 1,636 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1996 | 9–12 | 42.9% | #78 | 1,569 | 0 | 1 | 1992 | 23–17 | 57.5% | #36 | 1,734 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1997 | 7–11 | 38.9% | #60 | 1,581 | 0 | 1 | 1993 | 30–19 | 61.2% | #35 | 1,810 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 1998 | 7–16 | 30.4% | #82 | 1,568 | 0 | 1 | 1994 | 27–21 | 56.2% | #37 | 1,853 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 1999 | 2–7 | 22.2% | #188 | 1,518 | 0 | 1 | 1995 | 12–19 | 38.7% | #88 | 1,681 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2000 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #140 | 1,514 | 0 | 1 | 1996 | 10–14 | 41.7% | #72 | 1,664 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2001 | 9–11 | 45.0% | #117 | 1,583 | 0 | 1 | 1997 | 10–17 | 37.0% | #75 | 1,615 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2002 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #322 | 1,570 | 0 | 1 | 1998 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #283 | 1,595 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2003 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #395 | 1,552 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |