H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 10:34 UTC
Elena-Gabriela Ruse vs Shuai Zhang H2H: 0-2
Shuai Zhang holds a 2–0 lead over Elena-Gabriela Ruse in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Shuai Zhang leads 1–0 on clay and 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Shuai Zhang won the 2022 Birmingham fourth round 6-2 2-6 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.
ROU
Age 28
Right-Handed
172 cm / 5'8"
H2H
0
–
2
2 main draw meetings
CHN
Right-Handed
177 cm / 5'10"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 20, 2026 | Bad Homburg | WTA 500 | Q2 | Grass | Elena-Gabriela Ruse | 7-5 6-4 | Shuai Zhang | Match data |
| Jun 17, 2022* | Birmingham | WTA 250 | R16 | Grass | Shuai Zhang | 6-2 2-6 7-5 | Elena-Gabriela Ruse | Match data |
| May 3, 2018* | Prague | WTA 250 | R16 | Clay | Shuai Zhang | 6-4 6-4 | Elena-Gabriela Ruse | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Elena-Gabriela Ruse | #72 | #51 | 1,127 | 1,880 | 61 | 82 | 42.7% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Shuai Zhang | #54 | #22 | 1,905 | 1,856 | 225 | 288 | 43.9% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
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.
| Elena-Gabriela Ruse | Shuai Zhang | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles |
| 2016 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #266 | 1,490 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #203 | 1,495 | 0 | 0 |
| 2017 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #243 | 1,499 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #149 | 1,464 | 0 | 0 |
| 2018 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #251 | 1,515 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 0–6 | 0.0% | #235 | 1,412 | 0 | 0 |
| 2019 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #185 | 1,575 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 2–1 | 66.7% | #154 | 1,467 | 0 | 0 |
| 2020 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #159 | 1,596 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #90 | 1,492 | 0 | 0 |
| 2021 | 11–6 | 64.7% | #87 | 1,735 | 0 | 1 | 2011 | 8–22 | 26.7% | #126 | 1,443 | 0 | 0 |
| 2022 | 9–19 | 32.1% | #117 | 1,643 | 0 | 1 | 2012 | 2–6 | 25.0% | #127 | 1,456 | 0 | 0 |
| 2023 | 7–9 | 43.8% | #128 | 1,698 | 0 | 1 | 2013 | 9–4 | 69.2% | #52 | 1,599 | 0 | 1 |
| 2024 | 5–7 | 41.7% | #121 | 1,709 | 0 | 1 | 2014 | 18–24 | 42.9% | #61 | 1,602 | 0 | 1 |
| 2025 | 13–15 | 46.4% | #88 | 1,739 | 0 | 1 | 2015 | 4–12 | 25.0% | #139 | 1,519 | 0 | 1 |
| 2026 | 12–15 | 44.4% | #72 | 1,827 | 0 | 1 | 2016 | 22–19 | 53.7% | #23 | 1,722 | 0 | 1 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2017 | 23–24 | 48.9% | #36 | 1,762 | 0 | 2 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2018 | 28–27 | 50.9% | #40 | 1,726 | 0 | 2 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2019 | 18–23 | 43.9% | #40 | 1,680 | 0 | 2 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2020 | 12–10 | 54.5% | #35 | 1,731 | 0 | 2 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2021 | 15–24 | 38.5% | #60 | 1,632 | 0 | 2 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2022 | 34–26 | 56.7% | #25 | 1,732 | 0 | 3 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2023 | 4–18 | 18.2% | #245 | 1,525 | 0 | 3 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2024 | 5–12 | 29.4% | #205 | 1,576 | 0 | 3 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2025 | 10–7 | 58.8% | #81 | 1,731 | 0 | 3 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2026 | 8–15 | 34.8% | #54 | 1,714 | 0 | 3 |