H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Amélie Mauresmo vs Chia-Jung Chuang H2H: 1-0
Amélie Mauresmo holds a 1–0 lead over Chia-Jung Chuang in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Amélie Mauresmo leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Amélie Mauresmo won the 2004 Australian Open first round 6-1 6-0.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
FRA
Age 47
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
TPE
Right-Handed
168 cm / 5'6"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 21, 2004* | Australian Open | Grand Slam | R128 | Hard | Amélie Mauresmo | 6-1 6-0 | Chia-Jung Chuang | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Amélie Mauresmo | #21 | #1 | 4,992 | 2,217 | 458 | 183 | 71.5% | 2 | 6 | 1 | 15 | 1 | 25 |
| Chia-Jung Chuang | #752 | #177 | 175 | 1,514 | 2 | 6 | 25.0% | 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.
| Amélie Mauresmo | Chia-Jung Chuang | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles |
| 1995 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #250 | 1,488 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #211 | 1,500 | 0 | 0 |
| 1996 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #180 | 1,522 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #272 | 1,484 | 0 | 0 |
| 1997 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #100 | 1,555 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #201 | 1,477 | 0 | 0 |
| 1998 | 20–18 | 52.6% | #29 | 1,729 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #452 | 1,475 | 0 | 0 |
| 1999 | 32–14 | 69.6% | #10 | 1,914 | 0 | 1 | 2017 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #744 | 1,495 | 0 | 0 |
| 2000 | 26–12 | 68.4% | #16 | 1,932 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2001 | 43–12 | 78.2% | #9 | 2,029 | 0 | 6 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2002 | 45–15 | 75.0% | #6 | 2,060 | 0 | 8 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2003 | 45–17 | 72.6% | #4 | 2,061 | 0 | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2004 | 56–11 | 83.6% | #2 | 2,175 | 0 | 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2005 | 53–16 | 76.8% | #3 | 2,127 | 0 | 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2006 | 50–14 | 78.1% | #3 | 2,135 | 2 | 23 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2007 | 27–14 | 65.9% | #18 | 1,960 | 2 | 24 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2008 | 30–19 | 61.2% | #24 | 1,815 | 2 | 24 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2009 | 25–12 | 67.6% | #21 | 1,871 | 2 | 25 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |