H2H data updated: 2026-09-14 00:00 UTC

Amélie Mauresmo vs Fang Li H2H: 1-0

Amélie Mauresmo holds a 1–0 lead over Fang Li 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 1999 Key Biscayne round of 64 6-2 3-0 RET.

Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.

Amélie Mauresmo
FRA Age 47 Right-Handed 175 cm / 5'9"
H2H
1 – 0
1 main-draw meetings
Fang Li
CHN Age 53 Right-Handed 166 cm / 5'5"

H2H Match Log

PlayerScorePlayerMatch DataDateRoundTournamentCategorySurface
Amélie Mauresmo #14 6-2 3-0 (ret.) Fang Li #43 Match data Mar 20, 1999* R64 Key Biscayne Tier I → modern equivalent WTA 1000 Hard

Estimated match date where the exact historical date is unavailable. Arrows show an edition's recorded category and documented modern equivalent; unresolved editions keep their recorded category. Asterisked totals include editions mapped from documented historical predecessor categories. Mapping details.

Career Comparison

Player Current Peak Pts Elo W L Win % GS 1000 including documented historical predecessor categories Finals 500 including documented historical predecessor categories 250 including documented historical predecessor categories Titles
Amélie Mauresmo #21 #1 4,992 2,225 463 185 71.5% 2 6 1 15 1 25
Fang Li #488 #36 723 1,707 67 90 42.7% 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 Amélie Mauresmo Fang Li
YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles
15 1995 0–1 0.0% #250 1,488 0 0 — — — — — — —
16 1996 2–2 50.0% #180 1,522 0 0 — — — — — — —
17 1997 4–6 40.0% #100 1,556 0 0 — — — — — — —
18 1998 20–18 52.6% #29 1,728 0 0 — — — — — — —
19 1999 32–14 69.6% #10 1,911 0 1 1992 5–8 38.5% #119 1,543 0 0
20 2000 26–13 66.7% #16 1,906 0 2 1993 6–12 33.3% #132 1,529 0 0
21 2001 43–12 78.2% #9 2,022 0 6 1994 13–13 50.0% #67 1,608 0 0
22 2002 45–15 75.0% #6 2,061 0 8 1995 9–8 52.9% #93 1,622 0 0
23 2003 45–17 72.6% #4 2,065 0 10 1996 3–5 37.5% #199 1,591 0 0
24 2004 61–12 83.6% #2 2,178 0 15 1997 2–3 40.0% #69 1,599 0 0
25 2005 53–16 76.8% #3 2,133 0 19 1998 23–24 48.9% #40 1,676 0 0
26 2006 50–14 78.1% #3 2,165 2 23 1999 6–12 33.3% #86 1,585 0 0
27 2007 27–14 65.9% #18 1,972 2 24 2000 0–2 0.0% #503 1,542 0 0
28 2008 30–19 61.2% #24 1,820 2 24 2001 0–3 0.0% #488 1,500 0 0
29 2009 25–12 67.6% #21 1,873 2 25 — — — — — — —

Surface Results by Age

Seasons are aligned by the age each player spent most of that calendar year. Results cover completed main-draw matches. Bold green marks the higher win percentage when both players have at least 5 matches on that surface at the aligned age.

Age Amélie Mauresmo Fang Li
Yr HardClayGrassCarpet Yr HardClayGrassCarpet
W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win %
15 1995 — — — — 0 1 1 0.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
16 1996 — — — — 1 1 2 50.0% 1 1 2 50.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
17 1997 — — — — 3 3 6 50.0% — — — — 1 3 4 25.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
18 1998 9 7 16 56.3% 8 6 14 57.1% 1 2 3 33.3% 2 3 5 40.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
19 1999 19 7 26 73.1% 7 4 11 63.6% — — — — 6 3 9 66.7% 1992 5 5 10 50.0% 0 2 2 0.0% 0 1 1 0.0% — — — —
20 2000 8 5 13 61.5% 13 4 17 76.5% 0 1 1 0.0% 5 3 8 62.5% 1993 4 7 11 36.4% 2 2 4 50.0% 0 1 1 0.0% 0 2 2 0.0%
21 2001 15 7 22 68.2% 16 3 19 84.2% 2 1 3 66.7% 10 1 11 90.9% 1994 7 8 15 46.7% 3 2 5 60.0% 1 1 2 50.0% 2 2 4 50.0%
22 2002 25 5 30 83.3% 7 5 12 58.3% 7 2 9 77.8% 6 3 9 66.7% 1995 9 8 17 52.9% — — — — — — — — — — — —
23 2003 23 11 34 67.6% 15 3 18 83.3% 1 1 2 50.0% 6 2 8 75.0% 1996 3 4 7 42.9% 0 1 1 0.0% — — — — — — — —
24 2004 35 7 42 83.3% 19 3 22 86.4% 7 2 9 77.8% — — — — 1997 2 2 4 50.0% — — — — — — — — 0 1 1 0.0%
25 2005 36 10 46 78.3% 9 2 11 81.8% 5 2 7 71.4% 3 2 5 60.0% 1998 12 12 24 50.0% 10 9 19 52.6% 0 2 2 0.0% 1 1 2 50.0%
26 2006 32 10 42 76.2% 6 2 8 75.0% 7 1 8 87.5% 5 1 6 83.3% 1999 4 5 9 44.4% 2 5 7 28.6% 0 2 2 0.0% — — — —
27 2007 13 7 20 65.0% 6 4 10 60.0% 6 2 8 75.0% 2 1 3 66.7% 2000 0 2 2 0.0% — — — — — — — — — — — —
28 2008 21 14 35 60.0% 4 2 6 66.7% 3 2 5 60.0% 2 1 3 66.7% 2001 0 2 2 0.0% — — — — — — — — 0 1 1 0.0%
29 2009 12 7 19 63.2% 4 3 7 57.1% 4 2 6 66.7% 5 0 5 100.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Career — 248 97 345 71.9% 118 46 164 72.0% 44 19 63 69.8% 53 23 76 69.7% — 46 55 101 45.5% 17 21 38 44.7% 1 7 8 12.5% 3 7 10 30.0%

Advanced Statistics Comparison by Age

Seasons are aligned by the age each player spent most of that calendar year. Metrics use eligible main-draw results; point statistics use matches with detailed data. Bold green marks the stronger value when both underlying samples are sufficient. Lower is better for Schedule because a negative value means a tougher schedule. Career Schedule is normalized per 100 matches.

Age Amélie Mauresmo Fang Li
Yr Elo P+ Serve+ Return+ PD TPW% Hard Elo Clay Elo Grass Elo Set Win % Set Margin Dec. Set Tiebreak Pressure+ Schedule Yr Elo P+ Serve+ Return+ PD TPW% Hard Elo Clay Elo Grass Elo Set Win % Set Margin Dec. Set Tiebreak Pressure+ Schedule
15 1995 1488 98.9 — — — — — — — 33.3% -1.00 0–1 — — +0.12 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
16 1996 1523 102.5 — — — — — — — 50.0% -0.20 1–1 — — +0.03 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
17 1997 1556 126.4 — — — — -24 +36 — 48.0% -0.08 1–4 (20%) 1–2 (33%) 97.2 -0.06 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
18 1998 1729 146.0 — — — — -83 0 -114 51.2% +0.12 5–3 (63%) 5–4 (56%) 107.0 -0.59 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
19 1999 1912 159.1 — — — — -27 -138 — 61.2% +0.73 12–5 (71%) 5–5 (50%) 109.0 +1.67 1992 1544 119.3 — — — — +55 — — 39.3% -0.68 1–1 1–2 (33%) — +0.13
20 2000 1907 163.5 — — — — -30 +17 — 64.6% +1.38 5–7 (42%) 4–7 (36%) 93.9 -1.71 1993 1529 112.6 — — — — +30 +31 — 33.3% -1.36 4–2 (67%) 2–1 (67%) — -0.54
21 2001 2023 167.1 — — — — -34 +99 -402 70.7% +1.41 14–3 (82%) 10–3 (77%) 113.0 -2.74 1994 1609 120.8 — — — — -10 +8 — 49.2% -0.22 4–5 (44%) 2–1 (67%) 101.0 +0.90
22 2002 2062 162.6 — — — — +32 -20 -255 74.0% +1.75 6–7 (46%) 10–5 (67%) 98.8 -0.13 1995 1623 122.6 — — — — -4 — — 55.3% +0.32 3–3 (50%) 1–1 — +0.34
23 2003 2065 163.0 +5.99 +3.35 1.388 56.1% +3 +92 — 69.4% +1.11 13–5 (72%) 13–2 (87%) 108.6 -2.28 1996 1592 112.9 — — — — +22 — — 38.1% -0.48 3–2 (60%) 1–4 (20%) 97.6 +0.31
24 2004 2178 168.3 +7.28 +5.47 1.468 57.6% +1 +37 -262 78.5% +2.20 14–6 (70%) 8–5 (62%) 104.3 -0.48 1997 1600 118.4 — — — — +20 — — 45.5% 0.00 0–1 0–2 — +0.54
25 2005 2133 167.1 +5.80 +3.65 1.286 55.4% +23 +95 -185 72.0% +1.48 10–6 (63%) 7–2 (78%) 102.5 -0.83 1998 1676 134.1 — — — — +38 -58 — 49.0% -0.06 6–4 (60%) 6–2 (75%) 107.9 +1.15
26 2006 2166 170.3 +5.44 +4.78 1.215 54.1% +18 +5 -62 70.5% +1.49 15–4 (79%) 8–3 (73%) 108.7 -3.85 1999 1586 117.9 — — — — +101 -16 — 37.8% -0.59 1–2 (33%) 1–2 (33%) 97.9 -0.13
27 2007 1973 149.7 +4.23 +2.32 1.159 53.0% +81 +133 +141 63.4% +1.04 6–9 (40%) 6–8 (43%) 89.6 -1.04 2000 1542 89.1 — — — — — — — 20.0% -2.40 0–1 — — +0.39
28 2008 1820 135.6 +2.15 +2.79 1.128 52.5% +25 +198 +234 56.9% +0.66 14–8 (64%) 8–9 (47%) 94.5 +0.52 2001 1500 92.6 — — — — +80 — — 0.0% -4.50 — — — 0.00
29 2009 1873 146.4 +3.25 +2.00 1.095 52.0% +15 +92 +120 61.4% +0.83 12–4 (75%) 5–5 (50%) 103.7 -1.60 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Career — 2226 166.5 +4.45 +3.42 1.200 53.8% +5 +46 -86 66.9% +1.23 128–73 (64%) 90–60 (60%) 108.0 -2.04 — 1707 127.8 — — — — +28 -30 — 44.1% -0.42 22–21 (51%) 14–15 (48%) 100.5 +1.98

Career Rivalries

Each player's five most-played main-draw opponents. The current matchup is highlighted when it appears in a player's top five.