H2H data updated: 2026-09-13 00:00 UTC
Emilie Loit and Zi Yan are tied 1–1 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on clay. Most recently, Emilie Loit won the 2008 Roland Garros first round 1-6 6-4 8-6.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
| Player | Score | Player | Match Data | Date | Round | Tournament | Category | Surface |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Emilie Loit | 1-6 6-4 8-6 | Zi Yan | Match data | May 27, 2008* | R128 | Roland Garros | Grand Slam | Clay |
| Zi Yan | 1-6 7-6(6) 7-6(4) | Emilie Loit | Match data | May 20, 2006* | QF | Morocco Open | Tier IV → modern equivalent WTA 250 | Clay |
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.
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Emilie Loit | #161 | #27 | 1,016 | 1,779 | 162 | 180 | 47.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
| Zi Yan | #789 | #40 | 678 | 1,620 | 34 | 58 | 37.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
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 | Emilie Loit | Zi Yan | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2002 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #297 | 1,486 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 1997 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #243 | 1,498 | 0 | 0 | 2003 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #161 | 1,486 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1998 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #96 | 1,512 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #296 | 1,451 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1999 | 3–15 | 16.7% | #101 | 1,424 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 8–4 | 66.7% | #104 | 1,573 | 0 | 1 |
| 21 | 2000 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #101 | 1,457 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 6–16 | 27.3% | #166 | 1,484 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 2001 | 12–15 | 44.4% | #95 | 1,547 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 10–12 | 45.5% | #58 | 1,543 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 2002 | 19–17 | 52.8% | #58 | 1,625 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 7–14 | 33.3% | #126 | 1,527 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 2003 | 23–24 | 48.9% | #41 | 1,673 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #306 | 1,486 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 2004 | 29–20 | 59.2% | #45 | 1,668 | 0 | 2 | 2010 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #422 | 1,495 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2005 | 15–20 | 42.9% | #82 | 1,548 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 27 | 2006 | 20–16 | 55.6% | #56 | 1,622 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 2007 | 26–22 | 54.2% | #43 | 1,618 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 2008 | 5–15 | 25.0% | #137 | 1,518 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 2009 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #161 | 1,533 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
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 | Emilie Loit | Zi Yan | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | Hard | Clay | Grass | Carpet | Yr | Hard | Clay | Grass | Carpet | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 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 % | |||
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2002 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0.0% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 1997 | — | — | — | — | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0.0% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2003 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 50.0% | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0.0% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 1998 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 50.0% | 1 | 3 | 4 | 25.0% | — | — | — | — | 1 | 1 | 2 | 50.0% | 2004 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 0.0% | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0.0% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 1999 | 3 | 6 | 9 | 33.3% | 0 | 5 | 5 | 0.0% | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0.0% | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0.0% | 2005 | 6 | 2 | 8 | 75.0% | 2 | 2 | 4 | 50.0% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 21 | 2000 | 2 | 3 | 5 | 40.0% | 2 | 3 | 5 | 40.0% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2006 | 2 | 10 | 12 | 16.7% | 3 | 4 | 7 | 42.9% | 1 | 2 | 3 | 33.3% | — | — | — | — |
| 22 | 2001 | 4 | 6 | 10 | 40.0% | 7 | 6 | 13 | 53.8% | 1 | 1 | 2 | 50.0% | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0.0% | 2007 | 8 | 7 | 15 | 53.3% | 2 | 3 | 5 | 40.0% | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0.0% | — | — | — | — |
| 23 | 2002 | 6 | 7 | 13 | 46.2% | 12 | 8 | 20 | 60.0% | 1 | 1 | 2 | 50.0% | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0.0% | 2008 | 5 | 9 | 14 | 35.7% | 2 | 4 | 6 | 33.3% | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0.0% | — | — | — | — |
| 24 | 2003 | 10 | 11 | 21 | 47.6% | 10 | 8 | 18 | 55.6% | 2 | 3 | 5 | 40.0% | 1 | 2 | 3 | 33.3% | 2009 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0.0% | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0.0% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 25 | 2004 | 6 | 11 | 17 | 35.3% | 19 | 5 | 24 | 79.2% | 4 | 3 | 7 | 57.1% | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0.0% | 2010 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 50.0% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 26 | 2005 | 4 | 9 | 13 | 30.8% | 11 | 9 | 20 | 55.0% | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0.0% | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0.0% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 27 | 2006 | 5 | 8 | 13 | 38.5% | 13 | 6 | 19 | 68.4% | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0.0% | 2 | 1 | 3 | 66.7% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 2007 | 9 | 11 | 20 | 45.0% | 15 | 9 | 24 | 62.5% | 1 | 1 | 2 | 50.0% | 1 | 1 | 2 | 50.0% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 2008 | 1 | 7 | 8 | 12.5% | 3 | 6 | 9 | 33.3% | 1 | 1 | 2 | 50.0% | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0.0% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 2009 | — | — | — | — | 1 | 3 | 4 | 25.0% | — | — | — | — | 2 | 1 | 3 | 66.7% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Career | — | 51 | 80 | 131 | 38.9% | 94 | 72 | 166 | 56.6% | 10 | 14 | 24 | 41.7% | 7 | 14 | 21 | 33.3% | — | 24 | 37 | 61 | 39.3% | 9 | 16 | 25 | 36.0% | 1 | 5 | 6 | 16.7% | — | — | — | — |
Seasons are aligned by the age each player spent most of that calendar year. Detailed serve and return statistics available for 84/242 of Emilie Loit's and 52/70 of Zi Yan's main draw matches. Sample is shown as matches with detailed serve and return statistics / total main draw matches. Bold green marks the stronger value when both stat samples contain at least 5 matches; lower is better for DFs/M.
| Age | Emilie Loit | Zi Yan | ||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | Sample | Aces/M | DFs/M | 1st Sv% | 1st Pts% | 2nd Pts% | BP Saved% | BP Conv% | Svc Pts% | Ret Pts% | Yr | Sample | Aces/M | DFs/M | 1st Sv% | 1st Pts% | 2nd Pts% | BP Saved% | BP Conv% | Svc Pts% | Ret Pts% | |
| 21 | — | —/— | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2006 | 10/22 | 1.8 | 3.3 | 64.1% | 56.8% | 43.0% | 56.3% | 48.9% | 52.2% | 41.1% |
| 22 | — | —/— | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2007 | 18/22 | 1.3 | 2.6 | 65.3% | 60.0% | 45.6% | 47.1% | 55.2% | 54.9% | 44.5% |
| 23 | — | —/— | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2008 | 20/21 | 0.9 | 3.6 | 63.5% | 56.5% | 41.5% | 49.7% | 43.3% | 51.0% | 44.6% |
| 24 | 2003 | 8/47 | 1.3 | 2.4 | 62.2% | 65.0% | 52.9% | 56.7% | 36.8% | 60.6% | 43.0% | 2009 | 2/3 | 1.0 | 4.5 | 62.7% | 53.0% | 39.2% | 33.3% | 47.3% | 47.8% | 44.6% |
| 25 | 2004 | 4/49 | 1.5 | 3.0 | 58.5% | 60.4% | 45.6% | 43.3% | 45.3% | 54.9% | 39.2% | 2010 | 2/2 | 0.0 | 2.5 | 62.7% | 53.2% | 38.5% | 39.3% | 33.6% | 47.7% | 39.0% |
| 26 | 2005 | 5/35 | 1.4 | 3.0 | 52.1% | 67.1% | 43.2% | 51.3% | 48.2% | 56.1% | 48.6% | — | —/— | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 27 | 2006 | 15/36 | 2.3 | 2.4 | 63.3% | 58.3% | 46.8% | 55.7% | 48.5% | 54.0% | 45.5% | — | —/— | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 2007 | 31/48 | 1.8 | 3.0 | 64.1% | 60.0% | 45.7% | 50.1% | 49.0% | 54.5% | 45.5% | — | —/— | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 2008 | 15/20 | 2.0 | 2.9 | 66.4% | 55.8% | 37.9% | 40.8% | 41.0% | 49.6% | 39.2% | — | —/— | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 2009 | 6/7 | 2.7 | 3.5 | 62.6% | 63.4% | 43.1% | 51.0% | 60.7% | 55.4% | 40.8% | — | —/— | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Career | — | 84/342 | 1.9 | 2.9 | 63.1% | 60.1% | 44.8% | 49.9% | 46.9% | 54.3% | 43.7% | — | 52/92 | 1.2 | 3.2 | 64.2% | 57.5% | 43.0% | 49.1% | 48.3% | 52.3% | 43.7% |
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 | Emilie Loit | Zi Yan | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2002 | 1486 | 99.3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 0.0% | -2.50 | — | — | — | +0.03 |
| 18 | 1997 | 1499 | 112.1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 33.3% | -1.67 | 0–1 | — | — | -0.22 | 2003 | 1486 | 101.9 | — | — | — | — | +30 | — | — | 45.5% | -0.09 | 0–1 | 1–1 | — | +0.26 |
| 19 | 1998 | 1512 | 121.9 | — | — | — | — | +45 | +20 | — | 44.4% | -0.11 | 0–2 | 0–1 | — | +0.24 | 2004 | 1451 | 99.1 | — | — | — | — | +21 | — | — | 27.3% | -1.82 | 0–3 (0%) | 1–0 | — | -0.09 |
| 20 | 1999 | 1424 | 101.4 | — | — | — | — | +104 | +28 | — | 26.2% | -1.86 | 1–5 (17%) | 0–3 (0%) | — | +0.55 | 2005 | 1573 | 115.2 | — | — | — | — | +3 | -61 | — | 60.0% | +0.80 | 2–1 (67%) | 2–2 (50%) | 101.7 | +0.28 |
| 21 | 2000 | 1458 | 109.0 | — | — | — | — | +67 | +11 | — | 45.8% | -0.12 | 1–3 (25%) | 0–2 | — | +0.50 | 2006 | 1485 | 107.1 | -2.70 | -1.75 | 0.860 | 47.0% | -6 | +46 | +98 | 32.0% | -1.34 | 2–4 (33%) | 2–2 (50%) | 98.8 | -0.22 |
| 22 | 2001 | 1547 | 113.0 | — | — | — | — | -32 | -21 | — | 44.3% | -0.61 | 4–5 (44%) | 2–2 (50%) | 99.5 | +0.79 | 2007 | 1543 | 115.3 | -0.92 | 0.00 | 0.986 | 49.7% | +13 | -15 | — | 37.8% | -0.64 | 4–3 (57%) | 2–0 | — | +1.07 |
| 23 | 2002 | 1626 | 113.6 | — | — | — | — | -91 | +30 | — | 52.4% | -0.04 | 10–6 (63%) | 4–3 (57%) | 106.6 | +0.19 | 2008 | 1528 | 117.9 | -2.92 | -0.04 | 0.910 | 47.8% | +36 | -10 | — | 31.9% | -1.15 | 4–3 (57%) | 1–0 | — | -0.15 |
| 24 | 2003 | 1673 | 132.7 | +2.59 | +0.21 | 1.090 | 51.0% | -71 | +43 | -104 | 49.1% | -0.05 | 10–8 (56%) | 5–5 (50%) | 104.6 | -1.57 | 2009 | 1486 | 98.3 | -0.13 | -1.41 | 0.855 | 46.2% | — | — | — | 14.3% | -2.00 | 0–1 | — | — | +0.21 |
| 25 | 2004 | 1668 | 124.9 | -0.94 | -1.99 | 0.870 | 46.7% | -119 | +171 | -41 | 59.8% | +0.45 | 9–6 (60%) | 6–7 (46%) | 102.5 | +1.06 | 2010 | 1495 | 98.7 | -4.24 | -2.37 | 0.747 | 44.1% | — | — | — | 40.0% | -1.80 | 1–0 | 1–0 | — | +0.07 |
| 26 | 2005 | 1549 | 112.1 | -0.35 | +0.26 | 1.107 | 52.4% | -55 | +179 | — | 48.8% | -0.19 | 3–9 (25%) | 4–3 (57%) | 93.9 | +1.69 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 27 | 2006 | 1622 | 125.1 | -1.55 | +0.33 | 0.990 | 50.1% | -86 | +130 | — | 55.7% | +0.60 | 5–4 (56%) | 5–8 (38%) | 100.0 | +1.39 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 2007 | 1619 | 129.8 | -0.93 | +0.96 | 1.001 | 50.0% | -37 | +141 | — | 55.4% | +0.37 | 7–4 (64%) | 4–4 (50%) | 104.3 | -0.20 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 2008 | 1518 | 106.1 | -4.05 | -3.45 | 0.777 | 44.3% | 0 | +121 | — | 30.2% | -1.60 | 2–3 (40%) | 3–5 (38%) | 97.4 | -0.27 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 2009 | 1533 | 118.8 | +0.06 | -0.68 | 0.916 | 48.8% | +33 | +65 | — | 44.4% | -0.39 | 2–2 (50%) | 1–0 | — | +0.07 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Career | — | 1780 | 125.3 | -1.16 | -0.31 | 0.956 | 49.0% | -44 | +99 | -67 | 49.4% | -0.12 | 54–58 (48%) | 34–43 (44%) | 98.9 | +1.24 | — | 1621 | 114.0 | -2.13 | -0.50 | 0.916 | 48.1% | +15 | -3 | +98 | 36.5% | -0.88 | 13–16 (45%) | 10–5 (67%) | 102.5 | +1.60 |
Each player's five most-played main-draw opponents. The current matchup is highlighted when it appears in a player's top five.
| Opponent | W | L | M | Last Played | H2H |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Maria Elena Camerin | 2 | 3 | 5 | Aug 27, 2008 | H2H |
| Katarina Srebotnik | 1 | 4 | 5 | Feb 7, 2008 | H2H |
| Elena Likhovtseva | 2 | 3 | 5 | May 9, 2007 | H2H |
| Lourdes Domínguez Lino | 3 | 2 | 5 | May 6, 2006 | H2H |
| Magui Serna | 1 | 4 | 5 | Mar 5, 2003 | H2H |
| Opponent | W | L | M | Last Played | H2H |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nathalie Dechy | 1 | 3 | 4 | Jan 3, 2008 | H2H |
| Anna Chakvetadze | 1 | 2 | 3 | May 17, 2007 | H2H |
| Vera Dushevina | 1 | 1 | 2 | Feb 17, 2009 | H2H |
| Emilie Loit | 1 | 1 | 2 | May 27, 2008 | H2H |
| Agnes Szavay | 0 | 2 | 2 | May 14, 2008 | H2H |