H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Kai-Chen Chang vs Virginie Razzano H2H: 0-1
Virginie Razzano holds a 1–0 lead over Kai-Chen Chang in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Virginie Razzano leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Virginie Razzano won the 2010 Strasbourg third round 6-3 3-6 6-4.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
TPE
Right-Handed
167 cm / 5'6"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
FRA
Age 43
Right-Handed
174 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 20, 2010* | Strasbourg | WTA 500 | R32 | Clay | Virginie Razzano | 6-3 3-6 6-4 | Kai-Chen Chang | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kai-Chen Chang | #1,233 | #82 | 808 | 1,647 | 32 | 59 | 35.2% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Virginie Razzano | #1,226 | #16 | 2,420 | 1,876 | 200 | 216 | 48.1% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
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.
| Kai-Chen Chang | Virginie Razzano | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles |
| 2009 | 5–5 | 50.0% | #94 | 1,558 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #344 | 1,483 | 0 | 0 |
| 2010 | 9–15 | 37.5% | #117 | 1,564 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #143 | 1,507 | 0 | 0 |
| 2011 | 1–8 | 11.1% | #148 | 1,487 | 0 | 0 | 2001 | 10–12 | 45.5% | #87 | 1,589 | 0 | 0 |
| 2012 | 9–11 | 45.0% | #86 | 1,579 | 0 | 0 | 2002 | 11–12 | 47.8% | #76 | 1,662 | 0 | 0 |
| 2013 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #621 | 1,532 | 0 | 0 | 2003 | 15–20 | 42.9% | #72 | 1,613 | 0 | 0 |
| 2015 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #134 | 1,530 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 7–8 | 46.7% | #60 | 1,604 | 0 | 0 |
| 2016 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #131 | 1,604 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 16–22 | 42.1% | #51 | 1,608 | 0 | 0 |
| 2017 | 2–9 | 18.2% | #219 | 1,539 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 10–18 | 35.7% | #88 | 1,595 | 0 | 0 |
| 2018 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #401 | 1,538 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 34–20 | 63.0% | #28 | 1,805 | 0 | 2 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2008 | 14–20 | 41.2% | #58 | 1,633 | 0 | 2 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2009 | 31–20 | 60.8% | #19 | 1,801 | 0 | 2 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2010 | 9–15 | 37.5% | #113 | 1,660 | 0 | 2 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2011 | 13–13 | 50.0% | #83 | 1,681 | 0 | 2 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2012 | 5–9 | 35.7% | #160 | 1,633 | 0 | 2 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2013 | 9–8 | 52.9% | #99 | 1,683 | 0 | 2 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2014 | 4–8 | 33.3% | #165 | 1,621 | 0 | 2 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2015 | 4–2 | 66.7% | #200 | 1,657 | 0 | 2 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2016 | 5–4 | 55.6% | #169 | 1,647 | 0 | 2 |