H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Erika De Lone vs Shi-Ting Wang H2H: 0-2
Shi-Ting Wang holds a 2–0 lead over Erika De Lone in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Shi-Ting Wang leads 2–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Shi-Ting Wang won the 1996 Key Biscayne second round 6-2 6-3.
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 53
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H
0
–
2
2 main draw meetings
TPE
Age 52
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 23, 1996* | Key Biscayne | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard | Shi-Ting Wang | 6-2 6-3 | Erika De Lone | Match data |
| Jan 7, 1993* | Brisbane | WTA 500 | R32 | Hard | Shi-Ting Wang | 6-4 6-3 | Erika De Lone | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Erika De Lone | #425 | #65 | 501 | 1,603 | 42 | 100 | 29.6% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Shi-Ting Wang | #457 | #26 | 707 | 1,832 | 128 | 105 | 54.9% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 6 |
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 | Erika De Lone | Shi-Ting Wang | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 14 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1988 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,491 | 0 | 0 |
| 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1989 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,479 | 0 | 0 |
| 16 | 1989 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #298 | 1,472 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 1990 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #138 | 1,502 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 1991 | 9–14 | 39.1% | #110 | 1,558 | 0 | 0 | 1992 | 12–12 | 50.0% | #54 | 1,604 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1992 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #175 | 1,526 | 0 | 0 | 1993 | 21–9 | 70.0% | #30 | 1,780 | 0 | 2 |
| 20 | 1993 | 5–9 | 35.7% | #183 | 1,515 | 0 | 0 | 1994 | 21–12 | 63.6% | #42 | 1,775 | 0 | 3 |
| 21 | 1994 | 1–9 | 10.0% | #200 | 1,436 | 0 | 0 | 1995 | 17–9 | 65.4% | #44 | 1,776 | 0 | 4 |
| 22 | 1995 | 4–9 | 30.8% | #124 | 1,482 | 0 | 0 | 1996 | 25–15 | 62.5% | #40 | 1,805 | 0 | 6 |
| 23 | 1996 | 2–7 | 22.2% | #131 | 1,449 | 0 | 0 | 1997 | 15–18 | 45.5% | #68 | 1,682 | 0 | 6 |
| 24 | 1997 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #149 | 1,442 | 0 | 0 | 1998 | 13–17 | 43.3% | #58 | 1,642 | 0 | 6 |
| 25 | 1998 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #178 | 1,443 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 4–11 | 26.7% | #153 | 1,583 | 0 | 6 |
| 26 | 1999 | 5–7 | 41.7% | #67 | 1,500 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 27 | 2000 | 7–18 | 28.0% | #118 | 1,484 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 2001 | 0–5 | 0.0% | #180 | 1,428 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 2002 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #165 | 1,422 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |