H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 04:32 UTC
Lin Zhu vs Lesia Tsurenko H2H: 1-3
Lesia Tsurenko holds a 3–1 lead over Lin Zhu in their WTA head-to-head. Across 4 main-draw meetings, Lesia Tsurenko leads 3–1 on hard courts. Most recently, Lesia Tsurenko won the 2023 Beijing second round 6-0 3-0 RET.
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
1
–
3
4 main draw meetings
UKR
Age 37
Right-Handed
174 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 2, 2023 | Beijing | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard | Lesia Tsurenko | 6-0 3-0 (ret.) | Lin Zhu | Match data |
| Mar 10, 2023* | Indian Wells | WTA 1000 | R128 | Hard | Lesia Tsurenko | 6-4 6-3 | Lin Zhu | Match data |
| Feb 5, 2023 | Hua Hin | WTA 250 | F | Hard | Lin Zhu | 6-4 6-4 | Lesia Tsurenko | Match data |
| Feb 20, 2019* | Dubai | WTA 1000 | R32 | Hard | Lesia Tsurenko | 6-4 6-7(5) 6-3 | 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 |
| Lesia Tsurenko | #370 | #23 | 2,030 | 1,889 | 180 | 200 | 47.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 4 |
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 | Lesia Tsurenko | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 2009 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #284 | 1,483 | 0 | 0 |
| 2015 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #176 | 1,512 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #155 | 1,468 | 0 | 0 |
| 2016 | 5–4 | 55.6% | #124 | 1,566 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 3–7 | 30.0% | #113 | 1,467 | 0 | 0 |
| 2017 | 6–8 | 42.9% | #113 | 1,581 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 7–12 | 36.8% | #116 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 |
| 2018 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #120 | 1,546 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 11–18 | 37.9% | #68 | 1,507 | 0 | 0 |
| 2019 | 5–14 | 26.3% | #72 | 1,628 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 4–8 | 33.3% | #92 | 1,511 | 0 | 0 |
| 2020 | 4–5 | 44.4% | #91 | 1,605 | 0 | 0 | 2015 | 22–17 | 56.4% | #33 | 1,738 | 0 | 1 |
| 2021 | 8–7 | 53.3% | #114 | 1,623 | 0 | 1 | 2016 | 19–19 | 50.0% | #57 | 1,728 | 0 | 2 |
| 2022 | 6–11 | 35.3% | #84 | 1,609 | 0 | 1 | 2017 | 22–24 | 47.8% | #42 | 1,699 | 0 | 3 |
| 2023 | 28–24 | 53.8% | #37 | 1,741 | 0 | 2 | 2018 | 26–18 | 59.1% | #27 | 1,814 | 0 | 4 |
| 2024 | 12–16 | 42.9% | #120 | 1,655 | 0 | 2 | 2019 | 14–14 | 50.0% | #73 | 1,734 | 0 | 4 |
| 2025 | 7–10 | 41.2% | #168 | 1,680 | 0 | 2 | 2020 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #146 | 1,746 | 0 | 4 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2021 | 6–10 | 37.5% | #118 | 1,738 | 0 | 4 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2022 | 10–11 | 47.6% | #137 | 1,745 | 0 | 4 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2023 | 24–15 | 61.5% | #31 | 1,866 | 0 | 4 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2024 | 10–20 | 33.3% | #115 | 1,693 | 0 | 4 |