H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Monica Puig vs Jie Zheng H2H: 0-2
Jie Zheng holds a 2–0 lead over Monica Puig in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Jie Zheng leads 1–0 on clay and 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Jie Zheng won the 2014 S Hertogenbosch third round 6-4 7-5.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
PUR
Age 32
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H
0
–
2
2 main draw meetings
CHN
Age 43
Right-Handed
164 cm / 5'5"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 16, 2014 | S Hertogenbosch | WTA 250 | R32 | Grass | Jie Zheng | 6-4 7-5 | Monica Puig | Match data |
| Apr 6, 2011* | Charleston | WTA 500 | R64 | Clay | Jie Zheng | 3-6 7-6(10) 7-5 | Monica Puig | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Monica Puig | #1,073 | #27 | 1,570 | 1,838 | 128 | 136 | 48.5% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| 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 | Monica Puig | Jie Zheng | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 2011 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #211 | 1,492 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 2012 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #124 | 1,464 | 0 | 0 | 2002 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #185 | 1,507 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2013 | 13–15 | 46.4% | #56 | 1,571 | 0 | 0 | 2003 | 7–8 | 46.7% | #84 | 1,535 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2014 | 16–18 | 47.1% | #59 | 1,616 | 0 | 1 | 2004 | 10–17 | 37.0% | #79 | 1,551 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2015 | 15–23 | 39.5% | #92 | 1,579 | 0 | 1 | 2005 | 24–15 | 61.5% | #44 | 1,705 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 2016 | 31–22 | 58.5% | #32 | 1,713 | 0 | 1 | 2006 | 25–16 | 61.0% | #33 | 1,778 | 0 | 3 |
| 23 | 2017 | 19–21 | 47.5% | #58 | 1,709 | 0 | 1 | 2007 | 7–10 | 41.2% | #163 | 1,689 | 0 | 3 |
| 24 | 2018 | 18–14 | 56.2% | #53 | 1,775 | 0 | 1 | 2008 | 20–10 | 66.7% | #25 | 1,838 | 0 | 3 |
| 25 | 2019 | 16–17 | 48.5% | #79 | 1,692 | 0 | 1 | 2009 | 27–21 | 56.2% | #35 | 1,779 | 0 | 3 |
| 26 | 2020 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #105 | 1,629 | 0 | 1 | 2010 | 23–18 | 56.1% | #26 | 1,760 | 0 | 3 |
| 27 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2011 | 18–23 | 43.9% | #48 | 1,705 | 0 | 3 |
| 28 | 2022 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #1073 | 1,625 | 0 | 1 | 2012 | 25–23 | 52.1% | #26 | 1,658 | 0 | 4 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2013 | 17–17 | 50.0% | #53 | 1,688 | 0 | 4 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2014 | 12–13 | 48.0% | #91 | 1,670 | 0 | 4 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2015 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #962 | 1,648 | 0 | 4 |