H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 08:25 UTC
Jie Zheng vs Mary Pierce H2H: 0-1
Mary Pierce holds a 1–0 lead over Jie Zheng in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Mary Pierce leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Mary Pierce won the 2003 Hyderabad third round 6-3 0-6 6-3.
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
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
FRA
Age 51
Right-Handed
178 cm / 5'10"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 6, 2003* | Hyderabad | WTA 250 | R32 | Hard | Mary Pierce | 6-3 0-6 6-3 | 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 |
| Mary Pierce | #560 | #3 | 3,797 | 2,137 | 460 | 215 | 68.1% | 2 | 5 | 0 | 3 | 8 | 18 |
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 | Mary Pierce | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 14 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1989 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #243 | 1,480 | 0 | 0 |
| 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1990 | 6–7 | 46.2% | #107 | 1,543 | 0 | 0 |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1991 | 21–9 | 70.0% | #26 | 1,786 | 0 | 1 |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1992 | 31–9 | 77.5% | #13 | 1,901 | 0 | 4 |
| 18 | 2002 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #185 | 1,507 | 0 | 0 | 1993 | 38–15 | 71.7% | #12 | 2,003 | 0 | 5 |
| 19 | 2003 | 7–8 | 46.7% | #84 | 1,535 | 0 | 0 | 1994 | 43–16 | 72.9% | #5 | 2,053 | 0 | 5 |
| 20 | 2004 | 10–17 | 37.0% | #79 | 1,551 | 0 | 0 | 1995 | 35–14 | 71.4% | #5 | 2,008 | 1 | 7 |
| 21 | 2005 | 24–15 | 61.5% | #44 | 1,705 | 0 | 1 | 1996 | 17–11 | 60.7% | #24 | 1,899 | 1 | 7 |
| 22 | 2006 | 25–16 | 61.0% | #33 | 1,778 | 0 | 3 | 1997 | 45–15 | 75.0% | #7 | 2,053 | 1 | 8 |
| 23 | 2007 | 7–10 | 41.2% | #163 | 1,689 | 0 | 3 | 1998 | 35–12 | 74.5% | #7 | 2,120 | 1 | 12 |
| 24 | 2008 | 20–10 | 66.7% | #25 | 1,838 | 0 | 3 | 1999 | 45–19 | 70.3% | #5 | 2,053 | 1 | 13 |
| 25 | 2009 | 27–21 | 56.2% | #35 | 1,779 | 0 | 3 | 2000 | 29–11 | 72.5% | #7 | 2,033 | 2 | 15 |
| 26 | 2010 | 23–18 | 56.1% | #26 | 1,760 | 0 | 3 | 2001 | 6–8 | 42.9% | #129 | 1,839 | 2 | 15 |
| 27 | 2011 | 18–23 | 43.9% | #48 | 1,705 | 0 | 3 | 2002 | 14–13 | 51.9% | #52 | 1,752 | 2 | 15 |
| 28 | 2012 | 25–23 | 52.1% | #26 | 1,658 | 0 | 4 | 2003 | 23–17 | 57.5% | #33 | 1,786 | 2 | 15 |
| 29 | 2013 | 17–17 | 50.0% | #53 | 1,688 | 0 | 4 | 2004 | 22–16 | 57.9% | #29 | 1,754 | 2 | 16 |
| 30 | 2014 | 12–13 | 48.0% | #91 | 1,670 | 0 | 4 | 2005 | 41–12 | 77.4% | #5 | 2,119 | 2 | 18 |
| 31 | 2015 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #962 | 1,648 | 0 | 4 | 2006 | 9–8 | 52.9% | #79 | 1,967 | 2 | 18 |