H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Monica Seles vs Fang Li H2H: 2-0
Monica Seles holds a 2–0 lead over Fang Li in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Monica Seles leads 1–0 on clay and 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Monica Seles won the 1999 Roland Garros first round 6-2 6-4.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
USA
Age 52
Left-Handed
178 cm / 5'10"
H2H
2
–
0
2 main draw meetings
CHN
Right-Handed
166 cm / 5'5"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 26, 1999* | Roland Garros | Grand Slam | R128 | Clay | Monica Seles | 6-2 6-4 | Fang Li | Match data |
| Jul 31, 1998* | Stanford | WTA 250 | R16 | Hard | Monica Seles | 2-6 6-3 6-1 | Fang 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Monica Seles | #223 | #1 | 4,056 | 2,540 | 578 | 121 | 82.7% | 9 | 12 | 3 | 7 | 22 | 53 |
| Fang Li | #488 | #36 | 723 | 1,705 | 67 | 89 | 42.9% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
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.
| Monica Seles | Fang Li | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles |
| 1988 | 5–3 | 62.5% | #86 | 1,600 | 0 | 0 | 1992 | 5–7 | 41.7% | #119 | 1,547 | 0 | 0 |
| 1989 | 33–9 | 78.6% | #6 | 2,002 | 0 | 1 | 1993 | 6–12 | 33.3% | #132 | 1,531 | 0 | 0 |
| 1990 | 55–6 | 90.2% | #2 | 2,295 | 1 | 10 | 1994 | 13–13 | 50.0% | #67 | 1,609 | 0 | 0 |
| 1991 | 74–6 | 92.5% | #1 | 2,443 | 4 | 20 | 1995 | 9–8 | 52.9% | #93 | 1,613 | 0 | 0 |
| 1992 | 70–5 | 93.3% | #1 | 2,499 | 7 | 30 | 1996 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #199 | 1,585 | 0 | 0 |
| 1993 | 17–2 | 89.5% | #8 | 2,485 | 8 | 32 | 1997 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #69 | 1,594 | 0 | 0 |
| 1995 | 11–1 | 91.7% | #1 | 2,487 | 8 | 33 | 1998 | 23–24 | 48.9% | #40 | 1,676 | 0 | 0 |
| 1996 | 43–8 | 84.3% | #2 | 2,342 | 9 | 38 | 1999 | 6–12 | 33.3% | #86 | 1,585 | 0 | 0 |
| 1997 | 45–14 | 76.3% | #5 | 2,159 | 9 | 41 | 2000 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #503 | 1,541 | 0 | 0 |
| 1998 | 42–13 | 76.4% | #6 | 2,174 | 9 | 43 | 2001 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #488 | 1,500 | 0 | 0 |
| 1999 | 36–12 | 75.0% | #6 | 2,116 | 9 | 44 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2000 | 51–12 | 81.0% | #4 | 2,144 | 9 | 47 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2001 | 40–10 | 80.0% | #10 | 2,127 | 9 | 51 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2002 | 46–13 | 78.0% | #7 | 2,088 | 9 | 53 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2003 | 10–7 | 58.8% | #60 | 1,993 | 9 | 53 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |