H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 08:25 UTC
Kathy Rinaldi Stunkel vs Hu Na H2H: 2-1
Kathy Rinaldi Stunkel holds a 2–1 lead over Hu Na in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Hu Na leads 1–0 on carpet, while Kathy Rinaldi Stunkel leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Hu Na won the 1987 Princeton third round 1-6 6-4 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.
Age 59
Right-Handed
168 cm / 5'6"
H2H
2
–
1
3 main draw meetings
Age 63
173 cm / 5'8"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 26, 1987* | Princeton | WTA 250 | R32 | Carpet | Hu Na | 1-6 6-4 6-3 | Kathy Rinaldi Stunkel | Match data |
| May 28, 1986* | Roland Garros | Grand Slam | R128 | Clay | Kathy Rinaldi Stunkel | 6-1 6-3 | Hu Na | Match data |
| Oct 10, 1985* | Indianapolis 2 | WTA 250 | R32 | Hard | Kathy Rinaldi Stunkel | 6-0 6-0 | Hu Na | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kathy Rinaldi Stunkel | — | — | — | 2,082 | 277 | 213 | 56.5% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 4 |
| Hu Na | — | — | — | 1,701 | 60 | 94 | 39.0% | 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 | Kathy Rinaldi Stunkel | Hu Na | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 13 | 1980 | 4–5 | 44.4% | — | 1,505 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 14 | 1981 | 27–14 | 65.9% | — | 1,806 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 15 | 1982 | 30–19 | 61.2% | — | 1,871 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 16 | 1983 | 29–17 | 63.0% | — | 1,844 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 1984 | 27–19 | 58.7% | — | 1,850 | 0 | 2 | 1980 | 2–3 | 40.0% | — | 1,504 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 1985 | 41–16 | 71.9% | — | 1,975 | 0 | 3 | 1981 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,496 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1986 | 34–16 | 68.0% | — | 1,974 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 1987 | 15–8 | 65.2% | — | 1,903 | 0 | 4 | 1983 | 1–3 | 25.0% | — | 1,482 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1988 | 5–8 | 38.5% | — | 1,812 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 22 | 1989 | 16–15 | 51.6% | — | 1,789 | 0 | 4 | 1985 | 6–9 | 40.0% | — | 1,537 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 1990 | 15–18 | 45.5% | — | 1,698 | 0 | 4 | 1986 | 11–16 | 40.7% | — | 1,575 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 1991 | 7–15 | 31.8% | — | 1,590 | 0 | 4 | 1987 | 17–18 | 48.6% | — | 1,654 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 1992 | 10–15 | 40.0% | — | 1,586 | 0 | 4 | 1988 | 8–18 | 30.8% | — | 1,584 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 1993 | 12–13 | 48.0% | — | 1,629 | 0 | 4 | 1989 | 8–13 | 38.1% | — | 1,577 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 1994 | 1–5 | 16.7% | — | 1,586 | 0 | 4 | 1990 | 7–12 | 36.8% | — | 1,560 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 1995 | 1–2 | 33.3% | — | 1,608 | 0 | 4 | 1991 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,541 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 1996 | 3–8 | 27.3% | — | 1,555 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |