H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC

Jill Craybas vs Meilen Tu H2H: 3-1

Jill Craybas holds a 3–1 lead over Meilen Tu in their WTA head-to-head. Across 4 main-draw meetings, Jill Craybas leads 3–1 on hard courts. Most recently, Meilen Tu won the 2007 Memphis fourth round 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.

Jill Craybas
USA Age 52 Right-Handed 160 cm / 5'3"
H2H
3 – 1
4 main draw meetings
Meilen Tu
USA Age 48 Right-Handed 163 cm / 5'4"

H2H Match Log

DateTournamentCategoryRoundSurfaceWinnerScoreLoserMatch
Feb 23, 2007* Memphis WTA 500 R16 Hard Meilen Tu #70 6-3 6-1 Jill Craybas #55 Match data
Jan 6, 2005* Auckland WTA 250 R32 Hard Jill Craybas #59 6-2 6-2 Meilen Tu #162 Match data
Jan 3, 2003* Auckland WTA 250 R16 Hard Jill Craybas #57 6-4 6-4 Meilen Tu #73 Match data
Sep 14, 2002* Waikoloa WTA 250 R16 Hard Jill Craybas #77 7-6(2) 2-6 6-0 Meilen Tu #52 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
Jill Craybas #336 #39 974 1,695 161 256 38.6% 0 0 0 0 1 1
Meilen Tu #1,136 #35 769 1,692 103 163 38.7% 0 0 0 0 1 1

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 Jill Craybas Meilen Tu
YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles
16 — — — — — — — 1994 2–3 40.0% #160 1,542 0 0
17 — — — — — — — 1995 3–10 23.1% #161 1,506 0 0
18 — — — — — — — 1996 2–3 40.0% #157 1,518 0 0
19 — — — — — — — 1997 6–13 31.6% #81 1,519 0 0
20 — — — — — — — 1998 2–3 40.0% #209 1,533 0 0
21 1996 0–1 0.0% — 1,488 0 0 1999 3–11 21.4% #103 1,485 0 0
22 — — — — — — — 2000 6–9 40.0% #67 1,576 0 0
23 1998 0–1 0.0% #154 1,473 0 0 2001 25–23 52.1% #45 1,615 0 1
24 1999 0–4 0.0% #175 1,445 0 0 2002 16–24 40.0% #73 1,561 0 1
25 2000 1–2 33.3% #145 1,449 0 0 2003 4–14 22.2% #143 1,478 0 1
26 2001 8–17 32.0% #98 1,479 0 0 2004 2–4 33.3% #162 1,464 0 1
27 2002 19–15 55.9% #57 1,652 0 1 2005 4–9 30.8% #120 1,474 0 1
28 2003 16–22 42.1% #99 1,568 0 1 2006 7–9 43.8% #90 1,532 0 1
29 2004 12–21 36.4% #59 1,499 0 1 2007 20–22 47.6% #47 1,625 0 1
30 2005 19–23 45.2% #48 1,614 0 1 2008 1–6 14.3% #630 1,546 0 1
31 2006 18–25 41.9% #70 1,569 0 1 — — — — — — —
32 2007 12–27 30.8% #79 1,472 0 1 — — — — — — —
33 2008 22–25 46.8% #64 1,575 0 1 — — — — — — —
34 2009 12–21 36.4% #76 1,592 0 1 — — — — — — —
35 2010 12–23 34.3% #98 1,546 0 1 — — — — — — —
36 2011 6–20 23.1% #150 1,442 0 1 — — — — — — —
37 2012 3–7 30.0% #189 1,449 0 1 — — — — — — —
38 2013 1–2 33.3% #336 1,451 0 1 — — — — — — —