H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Marion Bartoli vs Na Li H2H: 1-2
Na Li holds a 2–1 lead over Marion Bartoli in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on hard courts, while Na Li leads 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Na Li won the 2013 Eastbourne fourth round W/O.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
FRA
Age 41
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H
1
–
2
3 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 21, 2013* | Eastbourne | WTA 500 | R16 | Grass | Na Li | (w/o) | Marion Bartoli | Match data |
| Feb 19, 2010* | Dubai | WTA 1000 | R16 | Hard | Na Li | 3-6 7-5 6-0 | Marion Bartoli | Match data |
| Mar 8, 2009* | Monterrey | WTA 500 | F | Hard | Marion Bartoli | 6-4 6-3 | Na Li | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Marion Bartoli | #13 | #7 | 5,160 | 1,996 | 402 | 267 | 60.1% | 1 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 2 | 8 |
| 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 | Marion Bartoli | Na Li | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | 2001 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #307 | 1,483 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 2002 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #104 | 1,511 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 2003 | 20–21 | 48.8% | #58 | 1,643 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #136 | 1,499 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2004 | 26–23 | 53.1% | #41 | 1,666 | 0 | 0 | 2001 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #302 | 1,483 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2005 | 26–25 | 51.0% | #37 | 1,632 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 21 | 2006 | 45–28 | 61.6% | #18 | 1,800 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 22 | 2007 | 47–31 | 60.3% | #10 | 1,873 | 0 | 3 | 2004 | 6–1 | 85.7% | #78 | 1,601 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 2008 | 30–26 | 53.6% | #17 | 1,809 | 0 | 3 | 2005 | 23–14 | 62.2% | #56 | 1,711 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 2009 | 46–22 | 67.6% | #11 | 1,882 | 0 | 5 | 2006 | 36–22 | 62.1% | #21 | 1,801 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 2010 | 36–21 | 63.2% | #16 | 1,820 | 0 | 5 | 2007 | 22–12 | 64.7% | #29 | 1,814 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2011 | 60–26 | 69.8% | #9 | 1,907 | 0 | 7 | 2008 | 24–12 | 66.7% | #23 | 1,843 | 0 | 2 |
| 27 | 2012 | 41–25 | 62.1% | #11 | 1,814 | 0 | 7 | 2009 | 35–17 | 67.3% | #15 | 1,914 | 0 | 2 |
| 28 | 2013 | 23–15 | 60.5% | #13 | 1,808 | 1 | 8 | 2010 | 36–20 | 64.3% | #11 | 1,844 | 0 | 3 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 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 |