H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Jie Zheng vs Dinara Safina H2H: 1-3
Dinara Safina holds a 3–1 lead over Jie Zheng in their WTA head-to-head. Across 4 main-draw meetings, Dinara Safina leads 2–0 on clay, while they are tied 1–1 on hard courts. Most recently, Jie Zheng won the 2009 Los Angeles fourth round 7-5 4-6 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
Age 43
Right-Handed
164 cm / 5'5"
H2H
1
–
3
4 main draw meetings
RUS
Age 40
Right-Handed
182 cm / 6'0"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 7, 2009* | Los Angeles | WTA 500 | R16 | Hard | Jie Zheng | 7-5 4-6 6-4 | Dinara Safina | Match data |
| May 8, 2009* | Rome | WTA 1000 | R16 | Clay | Dinara Safina | 5-7 6-1 7-6(3) | Jie Zheng | Match data |
| May 31, 2008* | Roland Garros | Grand Slam | R32 | Clay | Dinara Safina | 6-2 7-5 | Jie Zheng | Match data |
| Jan 19, 2005* | Australian Open | Grand Slam | R128 | Hard | Dinara Safina | 7-5 3-6 6-4 | Jie Zheng | 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 |
| Dinara Safina | #452 | #1 | 10,521 | 2,120 | 299 | 160 | 65.1% | 0 | 5 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 11 |
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 | Dinara Safina | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2002 | 12–5 | 70.6% | #68 | 1,667 | 0 | 1 |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2003 | 18–15 | 54.5% | #54 | 1,749 | 0 | 2 |
| 18 | 2002 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #185 | 1,507 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 20–19 | 51.3% | #44 | 1,713 | 0 | 2 |
| 19 | 2003 | 7–8 | 46.7% | #84 | 1,535 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 37–19 | 66.1% | #20 | 1,839 | 0 | 4 |
| 20 | 2004 | 10–17 | 37.0% | #79 | 1,551 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 44–21 | 67.7% | #11 | 1,871 | 0 | 4 |
| 21 | 2005 | 24–15 | 61.5% | #44 | 1,705 | 0 | 1 | 2007 | 38–22 | 63.3% | #15 | 1,862 | 0 | 4 |
| 22 | 2006 | 25–16 | 61.0% | #33 | 1,778 | 0 | 3 | 2008 | 51–18 | 73.9% | #3 | 2,020 | 0 | 8 |
| 23 | 2007 | 7–10 | 41.2% | #163 | 1,689 | 0 | 3 | 2009 | 55–16 | 77.5% | #2 | 1,951 | 0 | 11 |
| 24 | 2008 | 20–10 | 66.7% | #25 | 1,838 | 0 | 3 | 2010 | 13–16 | 44.8% | #63 | 1,795 | 0 | 11 |
| 25 | 2009 | 27–21 | 56.2% | #35 | 1,779 | 0 | 3 | 2011 | 11–9 | 55.0% | #132 | 1,783 | 0 | 11 |
| 26 | 2010 | 23–18 | 56.1% | #26 | 1,760 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 27 | 2011 | 18–23 | 43.9% | #48 | 1,705 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 2012 | 25–23 | 52.1% | #26 | 1,658 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 2013 | 17–17 | 50.0% | #53 | 1,688 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 2014 | 12–13 | 48.0% | #91 | 1,670 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 2015 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #962 | 1,648 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |