H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 04:32 UTC
Lin Zhu vs Alison Riske-Amritraj H2H: 0-2
Alison Riske-Amritraj holds a 2–0 lead over Lin Zhu in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Alison Riske-Amritraj leads 2–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Alison Riske-Amritraj won the 2020 Australian Open second 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.
CHN
Right-Handed
173 cm / 5'8"
H2H
0
–
2
2 main draw meetings
USA
Age 36
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 23, 2020* | Australian Open | Grand Slam | R64 | Hard | Alison Riske-Amritraj | 6-3 6-1 | Lin Zhu | Match data |
| Feb 11, 2019 | Doha | WTA 1000 | Q3 | Hard | Lin Zhu | 6-2 6-1 | Alison Riske-Amritraj | Match data |
| Jan 4, 2017* | Shenzhen | WTA 250 | R32 | Hard | Alison Riske-Amritraj | 7-6(5) 7-6(5) | Lin Zhu | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lin Zhu | #130 | #31 | 1,464 | 1,805 | 92 | 115 | 44.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| Alison Riske-Amritraj | #1,157 | #18 | 2,360 | 1,853 | 191 | 202 | 48.6% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
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.
| Lin Zhu | Alison Riske-Amritraj | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles |
| 2014 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #134 | 1,520 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 4–4 | 50.0% | #115 | 1,554 | 0 | 0 |
| 2015 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #176 | 1,512 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 3–8 | 27.3% | #136 | 1,529 | 0 | 0 |
| 2016 | 5–4 | 55.6% | #124 | 1,566 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #180 | 1,488 | 0 | 0 |
| 2017 | 6–8 | 42.9% | #113 | 1,581 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 11–6 | 64.7% | #57 | 1,642 | 0 | 0 |
| 2018 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #120 | 1,546 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 24–22 | 52.2% | #43 | 1,713 | 0 | 1 |
| 2019 | 5–14 | 26.3% | #72 | 1,628 | 0 | 0 | 2015 | 15–24 | 38.5% | #97 | 1,602 | 0 | 1 |
| 2020 | 4–5 | 44.4% | #91 | 1,605 | 0 | 0 | 2016 | 23–19 | 54.8% | #39 | 1,742 | 0 | 1 |
| 2021 | 8–7 | 53.3% | #114 | 1,623 | 0 | 1 | 2017 | 21–24 | 46.7% | #70 | 1,650 | 0 | 1 |
| 2022 | 6–11 | 35.3% | #84 | 1,609 | 0 | 1 | 2018 | 17–16 | 51.5% | #62 | 1,632 | 0 | 1 |
| 2023 | 28–24 | 53.8% | #37 | 1,741 | 0 | 2 | 2019 | 26–23 | 53.1% | #18 | 1,797 | 0 | 2 |
| 2024 | 12–16 | 42.9% | #120 | 1,655 | 0 | 2 | 2020 | 6–8 | 42.9% | #26 | 1,739 | 0 | 2 |
| 2025 | 7–10 | 41.2% | #168 | 1,680 | 0 | 2 | 2021 | 16–15 | 51.6% | #51 | 1,771 | 0 | 3 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2022 | 25–21 | 54.3% | #41 | 1,750 | 0 | 3 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2023 | 0–8 | 0.0% | #659 | 1,614 | 0 | 3 |