H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 16:32 UTC
Jil Teichmann vs Samantha Stosur H2H: 1-0
Jil Teichmann holds a 1–0 lead over Samantha Stosur in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Jil Teichmann leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Jil Teichmann won the 2017 Wuhan second round 6-4 3-6 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.
SUI
Age 29
Left-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
AUS
Age 42
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 26, 2017* | Wuhan | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard | Jil Teichmann | 6-4 3-6 6-3 | Samantha Stosur | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jil Teichmann | #119 | #21 | 2,101 | 1,876 | 98 | 107 | 47.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| Samantha Stosur | #531 | #4 | 6,195 | 2,068 | 451 | 335 | 57.4% | 1 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 4 | 9 |
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 | Jil Teichmann | Samantha Stosur | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 18 | 2016 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #209 | 1,524 | 0 | 0 | 2002 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #245 | 1,475 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2017 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #139 | 1,523 | 0 | 0 | 2003 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #163 | 1,492 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2018 | 3–6 | 33.3% | #148 | 1,531 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 17–16 | 51.5% | #65 | 1,609 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2019 | 14–11 | 56.0% | #69 | 1,632 | 0 | 2 | 2005 | 18–22 | 45.0% | #46 | 1,607 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2020 | 9–12 | 42.9% | #57 | 1,671 | 0 | 2 | 2006 | 29–24 | 54.7% | #29 | 1,749 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2021 | 23–20 | 53.5% | #37 | 1,766 | 0 | 2 | 2007 | 15–15 | 50.0% | #46 | 1,723 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2022 | 19–21 | 47.5% | #35 | 1,690 | 0 | 2 | 2008 | 17–11 | 60.7% | #52 | 1,746 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2023 | 11–20 | 35.5% | #147 | 1,613 | 0 | 2 | 2009 | 38–20 | 65.5% | #13 | 1,885 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2024 | 3–2 | 60.0% | #135 | 1,633 | 0 | 2 | 2010 | 43–19 | 69.4% | #6 | 1,927 | 0 | 2 |
| 27 | 2025 | 8–9 | 47.1% | #123 | 1,651 | 0 | 2 | 2011 | 46–21 | 68.7% | #6 | 1,977 | 1 | 3 |
| 28 | 2026 | 6–2 | 75.0% | #119 | 1,709 | 0 | 2 | 2012 | 40–23 | 63.5% | #9 | 1,883 | 1 | 3 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2013 | 40–22 | 64.5% | #18 | 1,902 | 1 | 5 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2014 | 32–22 | 59.3% | #22 | 1,883 | 1 | 6 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2015 | 34–22 | 60.7% | #27 | 1,789 | 1 | 8 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2016 | 24–19 | 55.8% | #21 | 1,716 | 1 | 8 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2017 | 22–19 | 53.7% | #41 | 1,734 | 1 | 9 |
| 34 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2018 | 17–23 | 42.5% | #74 | 1,663 | 1 | 9 |
| 35 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2019 | 14–16 | 46.7% | #99 | 1,631 | 1 | 9 |
| 36 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2020 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #112 | 1,607 | 1 | 9 |
| 37 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2021 | 1–9 | 10.0% | #382 | 1,522 | 1 | 9 |
| 38 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2022 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #529 | 1,511 | 1 | 9 |