H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Jie Zheng vs Tamira Paszek H2H: 1-0
Jie Zheng holds a 1–0 lead over Tamira Paszek 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 2008 Guangzhou quarterfinal 6-2 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
–
0
1 main draw meetings
Age 35
Right-Handed
165 cm / 5'5"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 20, 2008* | Guangzhou | WTA 500 | QF | Hard | Jie Zheng | 6-2 6-1 | Tamira Paszek | 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 |
| Tamira Paszek | — | — | — | 1,801 | 99 | 128 | 43.6% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
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 | Tamira Paszek | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 14 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2005 | 1–1 | 50.0% | — | 1,512 | 0 | 0 |
| 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2006 | 6–2 | 75.0% | — | 1,598 | 0 | 1 |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2007 | 15–14 | 51.7% | — | 1,730 | 0 | 1 |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2008 | 16–18 | 47.1% | — | 1,697 | 0 | 1 |
| 18 | 2002 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #185 | 1,507 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 5–9 | 35.7% | — | 1,626 | 0 | 1 |
| 19 | 2003 | 7–8 | 46.7% | #84 | 1,535 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 9–9 | 50.0% | — | 1,641 | 0 | 2 |
| 20 | 2004 | 10–17 | 37.0% | #79 | 1,551 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 19–21 | 47.5% | — | 1,664 | 0 | 2 |
| 21 | 2005 | 24–15 | 61.5% | #44 | 1,705 | 0 | 1 | 2012 | 18–20 | 47.4% | — | 1,687 | 0 | 3 |
| 22 | 2006 | 25–16 | 61.0% | #33 | 1,778 | 0 | 3 | 2013 | 2–17 | 10.5% | — | 1,483 | 0 | 3 |
| 23 | 2007 | 7–10 | 41.2% | #163 | 1,689 | 0 | 3 | 2014 | 1–4 | 20.0% | — | 1,475 | 0 | 3 |
| 24 | 2008 | 20–10 | 66.7% | #25 | 1,838 | 0 | 3 | 2015 | 1–4 | 20.0% | — | 1,447 | 0 | 3 |
| 25 | 2009 | 27–21 | 56.2% | #35 | 1,779 | 0 | 3 | 2016 | 6–9 | 40.0% | — | 1,498 | 0 | 3 |
| 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 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |