H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Jie Zheng vs Alicia Molik H2H: 2-1
Jie Zheng holds a 2–1 lead over Alicia Molik in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on hard courts, while Jie Zheng leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Jie Zheng won the 2010 Indian Wells fourth round 6-3 4-6 7-6(1).
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
CHN
Age 43
Right-Handed
164 cm / 5'5"
H2H
2
–
1
3 main draw meetings
AUS
Age 45
Right-Handed
182 cm / 6'0"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 12, 2010* | Indian Wells | WTA 1000 | R16 | Hard | Jie Zheng | 6-3 4-6 7-6(1) | Alicia Molik | Match data |
| Feb 17, 2010* | Dubai | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard | Alicia Molik | 6-3 4-6 6-2 | Jie Zheng | Match data |
| Apr 4, 2007* | Amelia Island | WTA 500 | R64 | Clay | Jie Zheng | 6-4 6-2 | Alicia Molik | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jie Zheng | #961 | #15 | 2,745 | 1,898 | 216 | 193 | 52.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 4 |
| Alicia Molik | #403 | #8 | 2,630 | 2,035 | 151 | 161 | 48.4% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 5 |
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 | Jie Zheng | Alicia Molik | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 18 | 2002 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #185 | 1,507 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 7–12 | 36.8% | #96 | 1,537 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2003 | 7–8 | 46.7% | #84 | 1,535 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 6–10 | 37.5% | #115 | 1,552 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2004 | 10–17 | 37.0% | #79 | 1,551 | 0 | 0 | 2001 | 14–17 | 45.2% | #47 | 1,613 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2005 | 24–15 | 61.5% | #44 | 1,705 | 0 | 1 | 2002 | 10–19 | 34.5% | #94 | 1,568 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2006 | 25–16 | 61.0% | #33 | 1,778 | 0 | 3 | 2003 | 25–16 | 61.0% | #36 | 1,705 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 2007 | 7–10 | 41.2% | #163 | 1,689 | 0 | 3 | 2004 | 37–18 | 67.3% | #13 | 1,938 | 0 | 4 |
| 24 | 2008 | 20–10 | 66.7% | #25 | 1,838 | 0 | 3 | 2005 | 17–14 | 54.8% | #28 | 1,779 | 0 | 5 |
| 25 | 2009 | 27–21 | 56.2% | #35 | 1,779 | 0 | 3 | 2006 | 6–14 | 30.0% | #165 | 1,632 | 0 | 5 |
| 26 | 2010 | 23–18 | 56.1% | #26 | 1,760 | 0 | 3 | 2007 | 18–22 | 45.0% | #56 | 1,628 | 0 | 5 |
| 27 | 2011 | 18–23 | 43.9% | #48 | 1,705 | 0 | 3 | 2008 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #308 | 1,577 | 0 | 5 |
| 28 | 2012 | 25–23 | 52.1% | #26 | 1,658 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 2013 | 17–17 | 50.0% | #53 | 1,688 | 0 | 4 | 2010 | 8–12 | 40.0% | #129 | 1,561 | 0 | 5 |
| 30 | 2014 | 12–13 | 48.0% | #91 | 1,670 | 0 | 4 | 2011 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #349 | 1,584 | 0 | 5 |
| 31 | 2015 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #962 | 1,648 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |