H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 08:25 UTC
Jie Zheng vs Tatiana Poutchek H2H: 1-0
Jie Zheng holds a 1–0 lead over Tatiana Poutchek 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 2004 Hyderabad fourth round 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
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
BLR
Age 47
Right-Handed
176 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 20, 2004* | Hyderabad | WTA 250 | R16 | Hard | Jie Zheng | 6-3 6-2 | Tatiana Poutchek | 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 |
| Tatiana Poutchek | #1,078 | #55 | 609 | 1,626 | 51 | 101 | 33.6% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
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 | Tatiana Poutchek | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1995 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #734 | 1,484 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2002 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #185 | 1,507 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 2003 | 7–8 | 46.7% | #84 | 1,535 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 2004 | 10–17 | 37.0% | #79 | 1,551 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #136 | 1,483 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2005 | 24–15 | 61.5% | #44 | 1,705 | 0 | 1 | 2000 | 5–7 | 41.7% | #86 | 1,506 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2006 | 25–16 | 61.0% | #33 | 1,778 | 0 | 3 | 2001 | 12–21 | 36.4% | #76 | 1,551 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2007 | 7–10 | 41.2% | #163 | 1,689 | 0 | 3 | 2002 | 14–22 | 38.9% | #100 | 1,513 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2008 | 20–10 | 66.7% | #25 | 1,838 | 0 | 3 | 2003 | 6–11 | 35.3% | #121 | 1,487 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2009 | 27–21 | 56.2% | #35 | 1,779 | 0 | 3 | 2004 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #223 | 1,476 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2010 | 23–18 | 56.1% | #26 | 1,760 | 0 | 3 | 2005 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #161 | 1,436 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2011 | 18–23 | 43.9% | #48 | 1,705 | 0 | 3 | 2006 | 3–7 | 30.0% | #123 | 1,418 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2012 | 25–23 | 52.1% | #26 | 1,658 | 0 | 4 | 2007 | 7–16 | 30.4% | #94 | 1,432 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2013 | 17–17 | 50.0% | #53 | 1,688 | 0 | 4 | 2008 | 3–6 | 33.3% | #171 | 1,448 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2014 | 12–13 | 48.0% | #91 | 1,670 | 0 | 4 | 2009 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #263 | 1,427 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | 2015 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #962 | 1,648 | 0 | 4 | 2010 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #421 | 1,419 | 0 | 0 |