H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Jie Zheng vs Gisela Dulko H2H: 2-2
Jie Zheng and Gisela Dulko are tied 2–2 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 4 main-draw meetings, Jie Zheng leads 2–1 on hard courts, while Gisela Dulko leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Jie Zheng won the 2009 Monterrey quarterfinal 6-3 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
Age 43
Right-Handed
164 cm / 5'5"
H2H
2
–
2
4 main draw meetings
ARG
Age 41
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 7, 2009* | Monterrey | WTA 500 | QF | Hard | Jie Zheng | 6-3 6-2 | Gisela Dulko | Match data |
| Jan 16, 2009* | Hobart | WTA 250 | R16 | Hard | Gisela Dulko | 6-3 6-3 | Jie Zheng | Match data |
| Apr 30, 2005* | Estoril | WTA 250 | QF | Clay | Gisela Dulko | 6-2 6-1 | Jie Zheng | Match data |
| Jan 16, 2005* | Hobart | WTA 250 | F | Hard | Jie Zheng | 6-2 6-0 | Gisela Dulko | 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 |
| Gisela Dulko | #305 | #26 | 1,695 | 1,798 | 192 | 179 | 51.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 4 |
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 | Gisela Dulko | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2001 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #188 | 1,488 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2002 | 4–3 | 57.1% | #154 | 1,528 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2002 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #185 | 1,507 | 0 | 0 | 2003 | 5–7 | 41.7% | #125 | 1,516 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2003 | 7–8 | 46.7% | #84 | 1,535 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 22–18 | 55.0% | #33 | 1,713 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2004 | 10–17 | 37.0% | #79 | 1,551 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 32–23 | 58.2% | #26 | 1,726 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2005 | 24–15 | 61.5% | #44 | 1,705 | 0 | 1 | 2006 | 16–23 | 41.0% | #59 | 1,573 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2006 | 25–16 | 61.0% | #33 | 1,778 | 0 | 3 | 2007 | 29–23 | 55.8% | #37 | 1,702 | 0 | 2 |
| 23 | 2007 | 7–10 | 41.2% | #163 | 1,689 | 0 | 3 | 2008 | 18–20 | 47.4% | #51 | 1,658 | 0 | 3 |
| 24 | 2008 | 20–10 | 66.7% | #25 | 1,838 | 0 | 3 | 2009 | 28–20 | 58.3% | #36 | 1,734 | 0 | 3 |
| 25 | 2009 | 27–21 | 56.2% | #35 | 1,779 | 0 | 3 | 2010 | 21–21 | 50.0% | #48 | 1,686 | 0 | 3 |
| 26 | 2010 | 23–18 | 56.1% | #26 | 1,760 | 0 | 3 | 2011 | 15–15 | 50.0% | #67 | 1,650 | 0 | 4 |
| 27 | 2011 | 18–23 | 43.9% | #48 | 1,705 | 0 | 3 | 2012 | 2–5 | 28.6% | #305 | 1,604 | 0 | 4 |
| 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 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |