H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Mona Barthel vs Jie Zheng H2H: 1-0
Mona Barthel holds a 1–0 lead over Jie Zheng in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Mona Barthel leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Mona Barthel won the 2013 Toronto second round 6-7(3) 6-3 7-6(1).
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
GER
Age 36
Right-Handed
185 cm / 6'1"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
CHN
Age 43
Right-Handed
164 cm / 5'5"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 5, 2013 | Toronto | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard | Mona Barthel | 6-7(3) 6-3 7-6(1) | Jie Zheng | Match data |
Career Comparison
| Player | Current | Peak | Pts | Elo | W | L | Win % | GS | 1000 | Finals | 500 | 250 | Titles |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mona Barthel | #223 | #23 | 1,762 | 1,841 | 151 | 179 | 45.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 4 |
| Jie Zheng | #961 | #15 | 2,745 | 1,898 | 216 | 193 | 52.8% | 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.
| Age | Mona Barthel | Jie Zheng | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2002 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #185 | 1,507 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2010 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #195 | 1,492 | 0 | 0 | 2003 | 7–8 | 46.7% | #84 | 1,535 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2011 | 5–6 | 45.5% | #69 | 1,551 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 10–17 | 37.0% | #79 | 1,551 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2012 | 29–23 | 55.8% | #39 | 1,682 | 0 | 1 | 2005 | 24–15 | 61.5% | #44 | 1,705 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 2013 | 24–22 | 52.2% | #34 | 1,646 | 0 | 2 | 2006 | 25–16 | 61.0% | #33 | 1,778 | 0 | 3 |
| 23 | 2014 | 23–23 | 50.0% | #42 | 1,712 | 0 | 3 | 2007 | 7–10 | 41.2% | #163 | 1,689 | 0 | 3 |
| 24 | 2015 | 24–26 | 48.0% | #45 | 1,672 | 0 | 3 | 2008 | 20–10 | 66.7% | #25 | 1,838 | 0 | 3 |
| 25 | 2016 | 6–13 | 31.6% | #158 | 1,555 | 0 | 3 | 2009 | 27–21 | 56.2% | #35 | 1,779 | 0 | 3 |
| 26 | 2017 | 17–18 | 48.6% | #48 | 1,600 | 0 | 4 | 2010 | 23–18 | 56.1% | #26 | 1,760 | 0 | 3 |
| 27 | 2018 | 14–20 | 41.2% | #77 | 1,625 | 0 | 4 | 2011 | 18–23 | 43.9% | #48 | 1,705 | 0 | 3 |
| 28 | 2019 | 6–13 | 31.6% | #183 | 1,552 | 0 | 4 | 2012 | 25–23 | 52.1% | #26 | 1,658 | 0 | 4 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2013 | 17–17 | 50.0% | #53 | 1,688 | 0 | 4 |
| 30 | 2021 | 3–11 | 21.4% | #275 | 1,458 | 0 | 4 | 2014 | 12–13 | 48.0% | #91 | 1,670 | 0 | 4 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2015 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #962 | 1,648 | 0 | 4 |
| 33 | 2024 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #171 | 1,525 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 35 | 2026 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #223 | 1,535 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |