H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Jie Zheng vs Tamarine Tanasugarn H2H: 1-2
Tamarine Tanasugarn holds a 2–1 lead over Jie Zheng in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Tamarine Tanasugarn leads 2–1 on hard courts. Most recently, Tamarine Tanasugarn won the 2004 Hyderabad quarterfinal 6-3 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
1
–
2
3 main draw meetings
THA
Age 49
Right-Handed
165 cm / 5'5"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 21, 2004* | Hyderabad | WTA 250 | QF | Hard | Tamarine Tanasugarn | 6-3 6-1 | Jie Zheng | Match data |
| Oct 3, 2003* | Japan Open | WTA 250 | R16 | Hard | Jie Zheng | 1-6 6-2 6-4 | Tamarine Tanasugarn | Match data |
| Sep 12, 2003* | Bali | WTA 250 | R16 | Hard | Tamarine Tanasugarn | 6-4 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 |
| Tamarine Tanasugarn | #947 | #19 | 1,508 | 1,818 | 267 | 273 | 49.4% | 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 | Tamarine Tanasugarn | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1993 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #407 | 1,482 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1994 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #227 | 1,492 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2002 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #185 | 1,507 | 0 | 0 | 1995 | 2–5 | 28.6% | #213 | 1,478 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2003 | 7–8 | 46.7% | #84 | 1,535 | 0 | 0 | 1996 | 9–5 | 64.3% | #75 | 1,609 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2004 | 10–17 | 37.0% | #79 | 1,551 | 0 | 0 | 1997 | 18–20 | 47.4% | #47 | 1,647 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2005 | 24–15 | 61.5% | #44 | 1,705 | 0 | 1 | 1998 | 20–21 | 48.8% | #37 | 1,701 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2006 | 25–16 | 61.0% | #33 | 1,778 | 0 | 3 | 1999 | 8–13 | 38.1% | #71 | 1,634 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2007 | 7–10 | 41.2% | #163 | 1,689 | 0 | 3 | 2000 | 30–18 | 62.5% | #28 | 1,787 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2008 | 20–10 | 66.7% | #25 | 1,838 | 0 | 3 | 2001 | 24–21 | 53.3% | #29 | 1,697 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2009 | 27–21 | 56.2% | #35 | 1,779 | 0 | 3 | 2002 | 32–26 | 55.2% | #28 | 1,676 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2010 | 23–18 | 56.1% | #26 | 1,760 | 0 | 3 | 2003 | 28–23 | 54.9% | #34 | 1,694 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2011 | 18–23 | 43.9% | #48 | 1,705 | 0 | 3 | 2004 | 19–24 | 44.2% | #66 | 1,623 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2012 | 25–23 | 52.1% | #26 | 1,658 | 0 | 4 | 2005 | 7–16 | 30.4% | #122 | 1,503 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 2013 | 17–17 | 50.0% | #53 | 1,688 | 0 | 4 | 2006 | 9–7 | 56.2% | #72 | 1,588 | 0 | 1 |
| 30 | 2014 | 12–13 | 48.0% | #91 | 1,670 | 0 | 4 | 2007 | 9–18 | 33.3% | #117 | 1,570 | 0 | 1 |
| 31 | 2015 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #962 | 1,648 | 0 | 4 | 2008 | 19–15 | 55.9% | #37 | 1,702 | 0 | 2 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2009 | 10–12 | 45.5% | #101 | 1,653 | 0 | 3 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2010 | 14–9 | 60.9% | #62 | 1,734 | 0 | 4 |
| 34 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2011 | 4–10 | 28.6% | #94 | 1,649 | 0 | 4 |
| 35 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2012 | 4–7 | 36.4% | #152 | 1,594 | 0 | 4 |
| 38 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2015 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #855 | 1,577 | 0 | 4 |