H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Fang Li vs Laura Golarsa H2H: 1-1
Fang Li and Laura Golarsa are tied 1–1 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Fang Li leads 1–0 on clay, while Laura Golarsa leads 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Fang Li won the 1998 Budapest fourth round 6-2 6-4.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
CHN
Right-Handed
166 cm / 5'5"
H2H
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
ITA
Age 58
Right-Handed
165 cm / 5'5"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 24, 1998* | Budapest | WTA 250 | R16 | Clay | Fang Li | 6-2 6-4 | Laura Golarsa | Match data |
| Jun 24, 1994* | Wimbledon | Grand Slam | R64 | Grass | Laura Golarsa | 6-3 6-0 | Fang Li | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fang Li | #488 | #36 | 723 | 1,705 | 67 | 89 | 42.9% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Laura Golarsa | #693 | #39 | 436 | 1,761 | 127 | 180 | 41.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
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.
| Fang Li | Laura Golarsa | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles |
| 1992 | 5–7 | 41.7% | #119 | 1,547 | 0 | 0 | 1985 | 5–1 | 83.3% | #166 | 1,563 | 0 | 1 |
| 1993 | 6–12 | 33.3% | #132 | 1,531 | 0 | 0 | 1986 | 5–5 | 50.0% | #167 | 1,593 | 0 | 1 |
| 1994 | 13–13 | 50.0% | #67 | 1,609 | 0 | 0 | 1987 | 6–10 | 37.5% | #121 | 1,575 | 0 | 1 |
| 1995 | 9–8 | 52.9% | #93 | 1,613 | 0 | 0 | 1988 | 11–14 | 44.0% | #79 | 1,619 | 0 | 1 |
| 1996 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #199 | 1,585 | 0 | 0 | 1989 | 22–18 | 55.0% | #58 | 1,706 | 0 | 1 |
| 1997 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #69 | 1,594 | 0 | 0 | 1990 | 14–16 | 46.7% | #61 | 1,689 | 0 | 1 |
| 1998 | 23–24 | 48.9% | #40 | 1,676 | 0 | 0 | 1991 | 3–13 | 18.8% | #213 | 1,546 | 0 | 1 |
| 1999 | 6–12 | 33.3% | #86 | 1,585 | 0 | 0 | 1992 | 5–10 | 33.3% | #125 | 1,522 | 0 | 1 |
| 2000 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #503 | 1,541 | 0 | 0 | 1993 | 17–18 | 48.6% | #69 | 1,637 | 0 | 1 |
| 2001 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #488 | 1,500 | 0 | 0 | 1994 | 13–22 | 37.1% | #112 | 1,582 | 0 | 1 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1995 | 5–10 | 33.3% | #149 | 1,551 | 0 | 1 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1996 | 1–8 | 11.1% | #145 | 1,468 | 0 | 1 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1997 | 7–9 | 43.8% | #62 | 1,532 | 0 | 1 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1998 | 10–16 | 38.5% | #94 | 1,570 | 0 | 1 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1999 | 3–10 | 23.1% | #168 | 1,513 | 0 | 1 |