H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Maria Vento-Kabchi vs Meilen Tu H2H: 1-0
Maria Vento-Kabchi holds a 1–0 lead over Meilen Tu in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Maria Vento-Kabchi leads 1–0 on carpet. Most recently, Maria Vento-Kabchi won the 1997 Quebec City third round 6-3 6-2.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
VEN
Age 52
Right-Handed
168 cm / 5'6"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
USA
Age 48
Right-Handed
163 cm / 5'4"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 23, 1997* | Quebec City | WTA 250 | R32 | Carpet | Maria Vento-Kabchi | 6-3 6-2 | Meilen Tu | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Maria Vento-Kabchi | #996 | #26 | 1,053 | 1,716 | 95 | 156 | 37.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Meilen Tu | #1,136 | #35 | 769 | 1,692 | 103 | 163 | 38.7% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
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 | Maria Vento-Kabchi | Meilen Tu | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1994 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #160 | 1,542 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1995 | 3–10 | 23.1% | #161 | 1,506 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 1992 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #551 | 1,496 | 0 | 0 | 1996 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #157 | 1,518 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1997 | 6–13 | 31.6% | #81 | 1,519 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1994 | 3–6 | 33.3% | #166 | 1,520 | 0 | 0 | 1998 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #209 | 1,533 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1995 | 5–8 | 38.5% | #86 | 1,551 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 3–11 | 21.4% | #103 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1996 | 1–6 | 14.3% | #139 | 1,504 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 6–9 | 40.0% | #67 | 1,576 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 1997 | 11–7 | 61.1% | #51 | 1,629 | 0 | 0 | 2001 | 25–23 | 52.1% | #45 | 1,615 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 1998 | 11–18 | 37.9% | #43 | 1,653 | 0 | 0 | 2002 | 16–24 | 40.0% | #73 | 1,561 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 1999 | 3–16 | 15.8% | #110 | 1,535 | 0 | 0 | 2003 | 4–14 | 22.2% | #143 | 1,478 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2000 | 7–14 | 33.3% | #104 | 1,537 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #162 | 1,464 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2001 | 4–7 | 36.4% | #155 | 1,534 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 4–9 | 30.8% | #120 | 1,474 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2002 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #172 | 1,512 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 7–9 | 43.8% | #90 | 1,532 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 2003 | 15–8 | 65.2% | #44 | 1,714 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 20–22 | 47.6% | #47 | 1,625 | 0 | 1 |
| 30 | 2004 | 18–26 | 40.9% | #48 | 1,628 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 1–6 | 14.3% | #630 | 1,546 | 0 | 1 |
| 31 | 2005 | 13–23 | 36.1% | #62 | 1,573 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 2006 | 2–12 | 14.3% | #324 | 1,461 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |