H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 22:30 UTC
Christina Mchale vs Na Li H2H: 0-2
Na Li holds a 2–0 lead over Christina Mchale in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Na Li leads 1–0 on clay and 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Na Li won the 2013 Sydney third round 7-6(2) 7-5.
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 34
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H
0
–
2
2 main draw meetings
CHN
Age 44
Right-Handed
172 cm / 5'8"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 10, 2013* | Sydney | WTA 500 | R32 | Hard | Na Li | 7-6(2) 7-5 | Christina Mchale | Match data |
| Jun 2, 2012* | Roland Garros | Grand Slam | R32 | Clay | Na Li | 3-6 6-2 6-1 | Christina Mchale | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Christina Mchale | #319 | #24 | 1,935 | 1,803 | 166 | 207 | 44.5% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Na Li | #9 | #2 | 7,585 | 2,124 | 334 | 155 | 68.3% | 2 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 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 | Christina Mchale | Na Li | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 2009 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #231 | 1,499 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 2010 | 8–9 | 47.1% | #109 | 1,556 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #136 | 1,499 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2011 | 19–17 | 52.8% | #43 | 1,716 | 0 | 0 | 2001 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #302 | 1,483 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2012 | 21–20 | 51.2% | #33 | 1,676 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 21 | 2013 | 13–18 | 41.9% | #66 | 1,636 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 22 | 2014 | 20–21 | 48.8% | #52 | 1,647 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 6–1 | 85.7% | #78 | 1,601 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 2015 | 18–21 | 46.2% | #63 | 1,635 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 23–14 | 62.2% | #56 | 1,711 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 2016 | 24–21 | 53.3% | #45 | 1,698 | 0 | 1 | 2006 | 36–22 | 62.1% | #21 | 1,801 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 2017 | 19–26 | 42.2% | #64 | 1,690 | 0 | 1 | 2007 | 22–12 | 64.7% | #29 | 1,814 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2018 | 8–17 | 32.0% | #151 | 1,568 | 0 | 1 | 2008 | 24–12 | 66.7% | #23 | 1,843 | 0 | 2 |
| 27 | 2019 | 7–10 | 41.2% | #88 | 1,652 | 0 | 1 | 2009 | 35–17 | 67.3% | #15 | 1,914 | 0 | 2 |
| 28 | 2020 | 6–8 | 42.9% | #81 | 1,675 | 0 | 1 | 2010 | 36–20 | 64.3% | #11 | 1,844 | 0 | 3 |
| 29 | 2021 | 2–16 | 11.1% | #159 | 1,524 | 0 | 1 | 2011 | 33–17 | 66.0% | #5 | 1,868 | 1 | 5 |
| 30 | 2022 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #319 | 1,452 | 0 | 1 | 2012 | 43–16 | 72.9% | #7 | 2,016 | 1 | 6 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2013 | 46–14 | 76.7% | #3 | 2,077 | 1 | 7 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2014 | 29–7 | 80.6% | #9 | 2,031 | 2 | 9 |