H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Marlene Weingartner vs Meilen Tu H2H: 0-3
Meilen Tu holds a 3–0 lead over Marlene Weingartner in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Meilen Tu leads 1–0 on clay and 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Meilen Tu won the 2005 Birmingham second round 7-6(5) 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.
GER
Age 46
Right-Handed
174 cm / 5'9"
H2H
0
–
3
3 main draw meetings
USA
Age 48
Right-Handed
163 cm / 5'4"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 8, 2005* | Birmingham | WTA 500 | R64 | Grass | Meilen Tu | 7-6(5) 6-2 | Marlene Weingartner | Match data |
| Jan 9, 2004* | Auckland | WTA 250 | R16 | Hard | Meilen Tu | 4-6 6-3 7-6(4) | Marlene Weingartner | Match data |
| Apr 10, 2002* | Amelia Island | WTA 500 | R64 | Clay | Meilen Tu | 6-4 4-0 (ret.) | Marlene Weingartner | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Marlene Weingartner | #1,051 | #36 | 808 | 1,677 | 84 | 134 | 38.5% | 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 | Marlene Weingartner | Meilen Tu | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 15 | 1995 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #231 | 1,480 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 16 | 1996 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #211 | 1,471 | 0 | 0 | 1994 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #160 | 1,542 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 1997 | 3–7 | 30.0% | #127 | 1,467 | 0 | 0 | 1995 | 3–10 | 23.1% | #161 | 1,506 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 1998 | 4–4 | 50.0% | #104 | 1,511 | 0 | 0 | 1996 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #157 | 1,518 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1999 | 7–14 | 33.3% | #92 | 1,533 | 0 | 0 | 1997 | 6–13 | 31.6% | #81 | 1,519 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2000 | 6–15 | 28.6% | #87 | 1,494 | 0 | 0 | 1998 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #209 | 1,533 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2001 | 21–26 | 44.7% | #42 | 1,545 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 3–11 | 21.4% | #103 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2002 | 9–20 | 31.0% | #97 | 1,483 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 6–9 | 40.0% | #67 | 1,576 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2003 | 17–15 | 53.1% | #47 | 1,664 | 0 | 0 | 2001 | 25–23 | 52.1% | #45 | 1,615 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 2004 | 13–17 | 43.3% | #71 | 1,628 | 0 | 0 | 2002 | 16–24 | 40.0% | #73 | 1,561 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 2005 | 3–11 | 21.4% | #381 | 1,507 | 0 | 0 | 2003 | 4–14 | 22.2% | #143 | 1,478 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2004 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #162 | 1,464 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2005 | 4–9 | 30.8% | #120 | 1,474 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2006 | 7–9 | 43.8% | #90 | 1,532 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2007 | 20–22 | 47.6% | #47 | 1,625 | 0 | 1 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2008 | 1–6 | 14.3% | #630 | 1,546 | 0 | 1 |