H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 17:48 UTC
Fang Li vs Manuela Maleeva Fragniere H2H: 0-1
Manuela Maleeva Fragniere holds a 1–0 lead over Fang Li in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Manuela Maleeva Fragniere leads 1–0 on carpet. Most recently, Manuela Maleeva Fragniere won the 1994 Tokyo Pan Pacific fourth round 6-2 6-2.
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
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
Age 59
Right-Handed
173 cm / 5'8"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 4, 1994* | Tokyo Pan Pacific | WTA 1000 | R16 | Carpet | Manuela Maleeva Fragniere | 6-2 6-2 | 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 |
| Manuela Maleeva Fragniere | #5 | #3 | 148 | 2,128 | 458 | 183 | 71.5% | 0 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 14 | 19 |
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 | Manuela Maleeva Fragniere | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1982 | 15–10 | 60.0% | — | 1,688 | 0 | 0 |
| 1993 | 6–12 | 33.3% | #132 | 1,531 | 0 | 0 | 1983 | 21–16 | 56.8% | — | 1,788 | 0 | 0 |
| 1994 | 13–13 | 50.0% | #67 | 1,609 | 0 | 0 | 1984 | 50–16 | 75.8% | #6 | 2,098 | 0 | 5 |
| 1995 | 9–8 | 52.9% | #93 | 1,613 | 0 | 0 | 1985 | 46–18 | 71.9% | #7 | 2,073 | 0 | 6 |
| 1996 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #199 | 1,585 | 0 | 0 | 1986 | 42–21 | 66.7% | #10 | 1,991 | 0 | 6 |
| 1997 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #69 | 1,594 | 0 | 0 | 1987 | 44–15 | 74.6% | #8 | 2,111 | 0 | 8 |
| 1998 | 23–24 | 48.9% | #40 | 1,676 | 0 | 0 | 1988 | 42–14 | 75.0% | #6 | 2,091 | 0 | 10 |
| 1999 | 6–12 | 33.3% | #86 | 1,585 | 0 | 0 | 1989 | 34–13 | 72.3% | #9 | 2,016 | 0 | 12 |
| 2000 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #503 | 1,541 | 0 | 0 | 1990 | 42–16 | 72.4% | #9 | 2,067 | 0 | 12 |
| 2001 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #488 | 1,500 | 0 | 0 | 1991 | 43–14 | 75.4% | #10 | 2,027 | 0 | 15 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1992 | 31–12 | 72.1% | #9 | 1,994 | 0 | 16 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1993 | 36–16 | 69.2% | #11 | 2,045 | 0 | 18 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1994 | 12–2 | 85.7% | #5 | 2,066 | 0 | 19 |