H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Elena Likhovtseva vs Fang Li H2H: 0-2
Fang Li holds a 2–0 lead over Elena Likhovtseva in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Fang Li leads 1–0 on clay and 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Fang Li won the 1998 Hobart third round 6-2 5-7 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.
RUS
Age 50
Right-Handed
174 cm / 5'9"
H2H
0
–
2
2 main draw meetings
CHN
Right-Handed
166 cm / 5'5"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 14, 1998* | Hobart | WTA 250 | R32 | Hard | Fang Li | 6-2 5-7 7-5 | Elena Likhovtseva | Match data |
| Jul 15, 1993* | Kitzbuhel | WTA 250 | R32 | Clay | Fang Li | 1-6 6-3 6-1 | Elena Likhovtseva | 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 Likhovtseva | #1,092 | #15 | 1,807 | 1,912 | 358 | 338 | 51.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
| Fang Li | #488 | #36 | 723 | 1,705 | 67 | 89 | 42.9% | 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.
| Elena Likhovtseva | Fang Li | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles |
| 1993 | 11–8 | 57.9% | #67 | 1,633 | 0 | 1 | 1992 | 5–7 | 41.7% | #119 | 1,547 | 0 | 0 |
| 1994 | 17–19 | 47.2% | #62 | 1,736 | 0 | 1 | 1993 | 6–12 | 33.3% | #132 | 1,531 | 0 | 0 |
| 1995 | 18–18 | 50.0% | #45 | 1,718 | 0 | 1 | 1994 | 13–13 | 50.0% | #67 | 1,609 | 0 | 0 |
| 1996 | 30–21 | 58.8% | #18 | 1,819 | 0 | 1 | 1995 | 9–8 | 52.9% | #93 | 1,613 | 0 | 0 |
| 1997 | 24–24 | 50.0% | #31 | 1,749 | 0 | 2 | 1996 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #199 | 1,585 | 0 | 0 |
| 1998 | 35–29 | 54.7% | #26 | 1,829 | 0 | 2 | 1997 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #69 | 1,594 | 0 | 0 |
| 1999 | 34–29 | 54.0% | #18 | 1,755 | 0 | 2 | 1998 | 23–24 | 48.9% | #40 | 1,676 | 0 | 0 |
| 2000 | 29–27 | 51.8% | #21 | 1,770 | 0 | 2 | 1999 | 6–12 | 33.3% | #86 | 1,585 | 0 | 0 |
| 2001 | 25–24 | 51.0% | #36 | 1,746 | 0 | 2 | 2000 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #503 | 1,541 | 0 | 0 |
| 2002 | 24–27 | 47.1% | #42 | 1,666 | 0 | 2 | 2001 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #488 | 1,500 | 0 | 0 |
| 2003 | 26–26 | 50.0% | #37 | 1,678 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2004 | 26–24 | 52.0% | #24 | 1,828 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2005 | 30–22 | 57.7% | #17 | 1,795 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2006 | 16–20 | 44.4% | #43 | 1,695 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2007 | 13–17 | 43.3% | #62 | 1,665 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2008 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #1044 | 1,634 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |