H2H data updated: 2026-07-20 02:15 UTC
Kurumi Nara vs Na Li H2H: 0-1
Na Li holds a 1–0 lead over Kurumi Nara in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Na Li leads 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Na Li won the 2010 Wimbledon second round 6-2 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.
JPN
Age 34
Right-Handed
155 cm / 5'1"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
CHN
Age 44
Right-Handed
172 cm / 5'8"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 24, 2010* | Wimbledon | Grand Slam | R64 | Grass | Na Li | 6-2 6-4 | Kurumi Nara | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kurumi Nara | #246 | #32 | 1,412 | 1,700 | 82 | 116 | 41.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Na Li | #9 | #2 | 7,585 | 2,124 | 334 | 155 | 68.3% | 2 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 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 | Kurumi Nara | Na Li | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 2009 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #181 | 1,512 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 2010 | 1–7 | 12.5% | #130 | 1,474 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #136 | 1,499 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2011 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #140 | 1,456 | 0 | 0 | 2001 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #302 | 1,483 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2012 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #148 | 1,437 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 21 | 2013 | 5–6 | 45.5% | #81 | 1,506 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 22 | 2014 | 23–21 | 52.3% | #44 | 1,649 | 0 | 1 | 2004 | 6–1 | 85.7% | #78 | 1,601 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 2015 | 19–22 | 46.3% | #81 | 1,588 | 0 | 1 | 2005 | 23–14 | 62.2% | #56 | 1,711 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 2016 | 15–18 | 45.5% | #77 | 1,595 | 0 | 1 | 2006 | 36–22 | 62.1% | #21 | 1,801 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 2017 | 10–15 | 40.0% | #102 | 1,581 | 0 | 1 | 2007 | 22–12 | 64.7% | #29 | 1,814 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2018 | 0–13 | 0.0% | #161 | 1,493 | 0 | 1 | 2008 | 24–12 | 66.7% | #23 | 1,843 | 0 | 2 |
| 27 | 2019 | 3–3 | 50.0% | #140 | 1,569 | 0 | 1 | 2009 | 35–17 | 67.3% | #15 | 1,914 | 0 | 2 |
| 28 | 2020 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #160 | 1,561 | 0 | 1 | 2010 | 36–20 | 64.3% | #11 | 1,844 | 0 | 3 |
| 29 | 2021 | 3–2 | 60.0% | #185 | 1,514 | 0 | 1 | 2011 | 33–17 | 66.0% | #5 | 1,868 | 1 | 5 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2012 | 43–16 | 72.9% | #7 | 2,016 | 1 | 6 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2013 | 46–14 | 76.7% | #3 | 2,077 | 1 | 7 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2014 | 29–7 | 80.6% | #9 | 2,031 | 2 | 9 |