H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Jie Zheng vs Elena Dementieva H2H: 1-0
Jie Zheng holds a 1–0 lead over Elena Dementieva in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Jie Zheng leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Jie Zheng won the 2010 Montreal fourth round 7-6(3) 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
–
0
1 main draw meetings
RUS
Age 44
Right-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 20, 2010* | Montreal | WTA 1000 | R16 | Hard | Jie Zheng | 7-6(3) 6-4 | Elena Dementieva | 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 |
| Elena Dementieva | #10 | #3 | 8,286 | 2,108 | 472 | 243 | 66.0% | 0 | 3 | 0 | 9 | 3 | 15 |
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 | Elena Dementieva | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1997 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #349 | 1,492 | 0 | 0 |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1998 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #186 | 1,478 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1999 | 11–11 | 50.0% | #62 | 1,584 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2002 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #185 | 1,507 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 33–19 | 63.5% | #11 | 1,859 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2003 | 7–8 | 46.7% | #84 | 1,535 | 0 | 0 | 2001 | 34–22 | 60.7% | #15 | 1,833 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2004 | 10–17 | 37.0% | #79 | 1,551 | 0 | 0 | 2002 | 36–26 | 58.1% | #19 | 1,763 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2005 | 24–15 | 61.5% | #44 | 1,705 | 0 | 1 | 2003 | 47–25 | 65.3% | #8 | 1,966 | 0 | 3 |
| 22 | 2006 | 25–16 | 61.0% | #33 | 1,778 | 0 | 3 | 2004 | 40–22 | 64.5% | #6 | 1,986 | 0 | 4 |
| 23 | 2007 | 7–10 | 41.2% | #163 | 1,689 | 0 | 3 | 2005 | 41–22 | 65.1% | #8 | 1,925 | 0 | 4 |
| 24 | 2008 | 20–10 | 66.7% | #25 | 1,838 | 0 | 3 | 2006 | 45–21 | 68.2% | #8 | 1,908 | 0 | 6 |
| 25 | 2009 | 27–21 | 56.2% | #35 | 1,779 | 0 | 3 | 2007 | 41–18 | 69.5% | #11 | 1,964 | 0 | 8 |
| 26 | 2010 | 23–18 | 56.1% | #26 | 1,760 | 0 | 3 | 2008 | 50–17 | 74.6% | #4 | 2,014 | 0 | 10 |
| 27 | 2011 | 18–23 | 43.9% | #48 | 1,705 | 0 | 3 | 2009 | 55–18 | 75.3% | #5 | 1,981 | 0 | 13 |
| 28 | 2012 | 25–23 | 52.1% | #26 | 1,658 | 0 | 4 | 2010 | 39–19 | 67.2% | #9 | 1,928 | 0 | 15 |
| 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 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |