H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Fang Li vs Nana Smith H2H: 0-2
Nana Smith holds a 2–0 lead over Fang Li in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Nana Smith leads 2–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Nana Smith won the 1995 Pattaya third round 6-7 6-1 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
–
2
2 main draw meetings
JPN
Age 55
Right-Handed
163 cm / 5'4"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 16, 1995* | Pattaya | WTA 250 | R32 | Hard | Nana Smith | 6-7 6-1 6-2 | Fang Li | Match data |
| Apr 7, 1994* | Tokyo Japan Open | WTA 250 | R32 | Hard | Nana Smith | 7-5 4-6 6-3 | 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 |
| Nana Smith | #669 | #51 | 332 | 1,649 | 65 | 114 | 36.3% | 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.
| Fang Li | Nana Smith | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1988 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #201 | 1,495 | 0 | 0 |
| 1993 | 6–12 | 33.3% | #132 | 1,531 | 0 | 0 | 1989 | 7–11 | 38.9% | #103 | 1,586 | 0 | 0 |
| 1994 | 13–13 | 50.0% | #67 | 1,609 | 0 | 0 | 1990 | 9–16 | 36.0% | #113 | 1,540 | 0 | 0 |
| 1995 | 9–8 | 52.9% | #93 | 1,613 | 0 | 0 | 1991 | 7–13 | 35.0% | #144 | 1,529 | 0 | 0 |
| 1996 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #199 | 1,585 | 0 | 0 | 1992 | 4–4 | 50.0% | #118 | 1,558 | 0 | 0 |
| 1997 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #69 | 1,594 | 0 | 0 | 1993 | 1–11 | 8.3% | #317 | 1,445 | 0 | 0 |
| 1998 | 23–24 | 48.9% | #40 | 1,676 | 0 | 0 | 1994 | 9–7 | 56.2% | #58 | 1,578 | 0 | 0 |
| 1999 | 6–12 | 33.3% | #86 | 1,585 | 0 | 0 | 1995 | 7–13 | 35.0% | #128 | 1,545 | 0 | 0 |
| 2000 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #503 | 1,541 | 0 | 0 | 1996 | 13–13 | 50.0% | #70 | 1,602 | 0 | 0 |
| 2001 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #488 | 1,500 | 0 | 0 | 1997 | 4–12 | 25.0% | #105 | 1,542 | 0 | 0 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1998 | 4–8 | 33.3% | #117 | 1,537 | 0 | 0 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1999 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #134 | 1,521 | 0 | 0 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2000 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #218 | 1,499 | 0 | 0 |