H2H data updated: 2026-09-14 00:00 UTC

Na Li vs Amélie Mauresmo H2H: 1-0

Na Li holds a 1–0 lead over Amélie Mauresmo in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Na Li leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Na Li won the 2009 Indian Wells Open third round 7-5 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.

Na Li
CHN Age 44 Right-Handed 172 cm / 5'8"
H2H
1 – 0
1 main-draw meetings
Amélie Mauresmo
FRA Age 47 Right-Handed 175 cm / 5'9"

H2H Match Log

PlayerScorePlayerMatch DataDateRoundTournamentCategorySurface
Na Li #45 7-5 6-2 Amélie Mauresmo #20 Match data Mar 16, 2009* R32 Indian Wells Open Premier Mandatory → modern equivalent WTA 1000 Hard

Estimated match date where the exact historical date is unavailable. Arrows show an edition's recorded category and documented modern equivalent; unresolved editions keep their recorded category. Asterisked totals include editions mapped from documented historical predecessor categories. Mapping details.

Career Comparison

Player Current Peak Pts Elo W L Win % GS 1000 including documented historical predecessor categories Finals 500 including documented historical predecessor categories 250 including documented historical predecessor categories Titles
Na Li #9 #2 7,585 2,117 338 159 68.0% 2 1 0 1 5 9
Amélie Mauresmo #21 #1 4,992 2,225 463 185 71.5% 2 6 1 15 1 25

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 Na Li Amélie Mauresmo
YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles
15 — — — — — — — 1995 0–1 0.0% #250 1,488 0 0
16 — — — — — — — 1996 2–2 50.0% #180 1,522 0 0
17 — — — — — — — 1997 4–6 40.0% #100 1,556 0 0
18 2000 1–3 25.0% #136 1,496 0 0 1998 20–18 52.6% #29 1,728 0 0
19 2001 0–1 0.0% #302 1,480 0 0 1999 32–14 69.6% #10 1,911 0 1
20 — — — — — — — 2000 26–13 66.7% #16 1,906 0 2
21 — — — — — — — 2001 43–12 78.2% #9 2,022 0 6
22 2004 6–1 85.7% #78 1,599 0 1 2002 45–15 75.0% #6 2,061 0 8
23 2005 23–14 62.2% #56 1,710 0 1 2003 45–17 72.6% #4 2,065 0 10
24 2006 36–22 62.1% #21 1,818 0 1 2004 61–12 83.6% #2 2,178 0 15
25 2007 22–12 64.7% #29 1,819 0 1 2005 53–16 76.8% #3 2,133 0 19
26 2008 28–14 66.7% #23 1,863 0 2 2006 50–14 78.1% #3 2,165 2 23
27 2009 35–17 67.3% #15 1,938 0 2 2007 27–14 65.9% #18 1,972 2 24
28 2010 36–20 64.3% #11 1,849 0 3 2008 30–19 61.2% #24 1,820 2 24
29 2011 33–17 66.0% #5 1,862 1 5 2009 25–12 67.6% #21 1,873 2 25
30 2012 43–17 71.7% #7 1,999 1 6 — — — — — — —
31 2013 46–14 76.7% #3 2,067 1 7 — — — — — — —
32 2014 29–7 80.6% #9 2,024 2 9 — — — — — — —

Surface Results by Age

Seasons are aligned by the age each player spent most of that calendar year. Results cover completed main-draw matches. Bold green marks the higher win percentage when both players have at least 5 matches on that surface at the aligned age.

Age Na Li Amélie Mauresmo
Yr HardClayGrassCarpet Yr HardClayGrassCarpet
W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win % W L M Win %
15 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1995 — — — — 0 1 1 0.0% — — — — — — — —
16 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1996 — — — — 1 1 2 50.0% 1 1 2 50.0% — — — —
17 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1997 — — — — 3 3 6 50.0% — — — — 1 3 4 25.0%
18 2000 1 3 4 25.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — 1998 9 7 16 56.3% 8 6 14 57.1% 1 2 3 33.3% 2 3 5 40.0%
19 2001 0 1 1 0.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — 1999 19 7 26 73.1% 7 4 11 63.6% — — — — 6 3 9 66.7%
20 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 2000 8 5 13 61.5% 13 4 17 76.5% 0 1 1 0.0% 5 3 8 62.5%
21 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 2001 15 7 22 68.2% 16 3 19 84.2% 2 1 3 66.7% 10 1 11 90.9%
22 2004 6 1 7 85.7% — — — — — — — — — — — — 2002 25 5 30 83.3% 7 5 12 58.3% 7 2 9 77.8% 6 3 9 66.7%
23 2005 16 12 28 57.1% 7 2 9 77.8% — — — — — — — — 2003 23 11 34 67.6% 15 3 18 83.3% 1 1 2 50.0% 6 2 8 75.0%
24 2006 18 14 32 56.3% 12 4 16 75.0% 6 3 9 66.7% 0 1 1 0.0% 2004 35 7 42 83.3% 19 3 22 86.4% 7 2 9 77.8% — — — —
25 2007 13 5 18 72.2% 6 5 11 54.5% 2 1 3 66.7% 1 1 2 50.0% 2005 36 10 46 78.3% 9 2 11 81.8% 5 2 7 71.4% 3 2 5 60.0%
26 2008 26 12 38 68.4% — — — — 2 2 4 50.0% — — — — 2006 32 10 42 76.2% 6 2 8 75.0% 7 1 8 87.5% 5 1 6 83.3%
27 2009 22 9 31 71.0% 5 4 9 55.6% 7 3 10 70.0% 1 1 2 50.0% 2007 13 7 20 65.0% 6 4 10 60.0% 6 2 8 75.0% 2 1 3 66.7%
28 2010 17 14 31 54.8% 10 4 14 71.4% 9 2 11 81.8% — — — — 2008 21 14 35 60.0% 4 2 6 66.7% 3 2 5 60.0% 2 1 3 66.7%
29 2011 16 12 28 57.1% 15 3 18 83.3% 2 2 4 50.0% — — — — 2009 12 7 19 63.2% 4 3 7 57.1% 4 2 6 66.7% 5 0 5 100.0%
30 2012 30 10 40 75.0% 12 4 16 75.0% 1 2 3 33.3% 0 1 1 0.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
31 2013 35 8 43 81.4% 5 4 9 55.6% 6 2 8 75.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
32 2014 22 3 25 88.0% 5 3 8 62.5% 2 1 3 66.7% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Career — 222 104 326 68.1% 77 33 110 70.0% 37 18 55 67.3% 2 4 6 33.3% — 248 97 345 71.9% 118 46 164 72.0% 44 19 63 69.8% 53 23 76 69.7%

Performance Progression by Age

Seasons are aligned by the age each player spent most of that calendar year. Detailed serve and return statistics available for 372/485 of Na Li's and 222/395 of Amélie Mauresmo's main draw matches. Sample is shown as matches with detailed serve and return statistics / total main draw matches. Bold green marks the stronger value when both stat samples contain at least 5 matches; lower is better for DFs/M.

Age Na Li Amélie Mauresmo
Yr Sample Aces/M DFs/M 1st Sv% 1st Pts% 2nd Pts% BP Saved% BP Conv% Svc Pts% Ret Pts% Yr Sample Aces/M DFs/M 1st Sv% 1st Pts% 2nd Pts% BP Saved% BP Conv% Svc Pts% Ret Pts%
23 2005 2/37 1.5 3.5 71.4% 54.3% 62.6% 49.2% 41.7% 56.3% 43.6% 2003 10/62 2.3 2.9 63.3% 73.3% 50.3% 41.3% 41.8% 65.2% 48.3%
24 2006 36/58 1.9 2.3 71.1% 61.5% 49.3% 51.6% 50.5% 57.6% 45.2% 2004 18/73 4.5 4.4 58.2% 74.6% 52.0% 54.6% 50.2% 65.2% 51.1%
25 2007 33/34 1.5 2.0 71.5% 62.4% 51.9% 52.6% 45.7% 59.2% 46.2% 2005 24/69 3.2 4.3 58.0% 72.7% 50.1% 57.2% 55.5% 63.0% 47.6%
26 2008 32/42 2.2 3.9 66.3% 63.4% 48.3% 58.5% 51.1% 58.2% 46.8% 2006 55/64 2.6 2.9 64.8% 68.0% 49.1% 60.4% 53.9% 61.2% 47.1%
27 2009 47/52 2.1 2.9 63.9% 65.4% 51.1% 45.7% 50.4% 59.9% 46.1% 2007 36/41 4.4 4.8 61.2% 69.9% 45.6% 56.1% 53.4% 60.6% 45.7%
28 2010 48/56 2.3 2.9 68.5% 65.7% 49.2% 50.4% 51.7% 60.4% 47.3% 2008 45/49 3.3 6.3 61.4% 67.4% 43.0% 56.0% 51.2% 57.9% 47.5%
29 2011 39/50 2.1 3.2 69.1% 64.4% 47.3% 54.6% 51.5% 59.1% 45.2% 2009 34/37 4.0 5.5 60.2% 67.0% 45.7% 55.9% 48.6% 58.9% 45.1%
30 2012 49/60 2.3 3.0 68.7% 65.1% 53.5% 57.5% 51.0% 61.2% 47.8% — —/— — — — — — — — — —
31 2013 52/60 2.8 4.2 63.2% 67.9% 49.4% 58.5% 57.2% 61.0% 49.3% — —/— — — — — — — — — —
32 2014 34/36 1.9 4.0 66.5% 66.3% 49.7% 55.6% 57.2% 60.8% 50.0% — —/— — — — — — — — — —
Career — 372/497 2.2 3.2 67.4% 64.9% 50.1% 53.8% 51.9% 59.9% 47.2% — 222/648 3.5 4.6 61.5% 69.3% 47.2% 56.4% 51.8% 60.8% 47.1%

Advanced Statistics Comparison by Age

Seasons are aligned by the age each player spent most of that calendar year. Metrics use eligible main-draw results; point statistics use matches with detailed data. Bold green marks the stronger value when both underlying samples are sufficient. Lower is better for Schedule because a negative value means a tougher schedule. Career Schedule is normalized per 100 matches.

Age Na Li Amélie Mauresmo
Yr Elo P+ Serve+ Return+ PD TPW% Hard Elo Clay Elo Grass Elo Set Win % Set Margin Dec. Set Tiebreak Pressure+ Schedule Yr Elo P+ Serve+ Return+ PD TPW% Hard Elo Clay Elo Grass Elo Set Win % Set Margin Dec. Set Tiebreak Pressure+ Schedule
15 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1995 1488 98.9 — — — — — — — 33.3% -1.00 0–1 — — +0.12
16 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1996 1523 102.5 — — — — — — — 50.0% -0.20 1–1 — — +0.03
17 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1997 1556 126.4 — — — — -24 +36 — 48.0% -0.08 1–4 (20%) 1–2 (33%) 97.2 -0.06
18 2000 1497 107.1 — — — — +34 — — 14.3% -2.14 0–1 — — -0.21 1998 1729 146.0 — — — — -83 0 -114 51.2% +0.12 5–3 (63%) 5–4 (56%) 107.0 -0.59
19 2001 1481 95.3 — — — — — — — 0.0% -4.00 — — — +0.12 1999 1912 159.1 — — — — -27 -138 — 61.2% +0.73 12–5 (71%) 5–5 (50%) 109.0 +1.67
20 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 2000 1907 163.5 — — — — -30 +17 — 64.6% +1.38 5–7 (42%) 4–7 (36%) 93.9 -1.71
21 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 2001 2023 167.1 — — — — -34 +99 -402 70.7% +1.41 14–3 (82%) 10–3 (77%) 113.0 -2.74
22 2004 1600 125.7 — — — — +18 — — 81.3% +1.81 1–1 2–1 (67%) — +0.22 2002 2062 162.6 — — — — +32 -20 -255 74.0% +1.75 6–7 (46%) 10–5 (67%) 98.8 -0.13
23 2005 1711 139.1 -0.18 +0.14 0.999 49.8% -25 -56 — 61.4% +1.04 8–5 (62%) 4–4 (50%) 103.5 -0.97 2003 2065 163.0 +5.99 +3.35 1.388 56.1% +3 +92 — 69.4% +1.11 13–5 (72%) 13–2 (87%) 108.6 -2.28
24 2006 1819 148.7 +1.65 +1.60 1.068 51.4% -79 -12 -62 61.2% +1.05 9–4 (69%) 7–4 (64%) 111.4 -2.52 2004 2178 168.3 +7.28 +5.47 1.468 57.6% +1 +37 -262 78.5% +2.20 14–6 (70%) 8–5 (62%) 104.3 -0.48
25 2007 1820 150.2 +2.75 +2.06 1.133 52.7% +69 -38 -48 62.2% +0.96 7–7 (50%) 3–1 (75%) 102.0 +0.95 2005 2133 167.1 +5.80 +3.65 1.286 55.4% +23 +95 -185 72.0% +1.48 10–6 (63%) 7–2 (78%) 102.5 -0.83
26 2008 1864 153.7 +2.74 +2.93 1.119 52.6% +37 — -127 60.4% +0.83 12–5 (71%) 4–4 (50%) 103.2 -1.80 2006 2166 170.3 +5.44 +4.78 1.215 54.1% +18 +5 -62 70.5% +1.49 15–4 (79%) 8–3 (73%) 108.7 -3.85
27 2009 1938 153.8 +4.35 +2.54 1.150 52.7% +49 -152 -127 64.9% +1.04 10–6 (63%) 8–6 (57%) 103.4 -2.23 2007 1973 149.7 +4.23 +2.32 1.159 53.0% +81 +133 +141 63.4% +1.04 6–9 (40%) 6–8 (43%) 89.6 -1.04
28 2010 1850 150.5 +4.51 +3.61 1.195 53.7% -23 -4 +91 64.3% +1.23 9–9 (50%) 6–7 (46%) 96.6 +0.93 2008 1820 135.6 +2.15 +2.79 1.128 52.5% +25 +198 +234 56.9% +0.66 14–8 (64%) 8–9 (47%) 94.5 +0.52
29 2011 1862 151.3 +3.52 +2.62 1.106 52.2% -57 +131 +42 62.8% +0.61 8–7 (53%) 9–6 (60%) 102.8 -0.26 2009 1873 146.4 +3.25 +2.00 1.095 52.0% +15 +92 +120 61.4% +0.83 12–4 (75%) 5–5 (50%) 103.7 -1.60
30 2012 2000 162.2 +5.42 +5.11 1.234 54.2% -1 -5 -158 68.1% +1.30 11–10 (52%) 6–4 (60%) 100.7 0.00 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
31 2013 2067 165.5 +5.56 +6.05 1.265 55.0% +56 -126 -177 72.1% +1.64 8–5 (62%) 7–6 (54%) 99.0 -2.68 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
32 2014 2024 155.9 +4.17 +5.37 1.275 55.5% +114 -110 -151 75.0% +1.82 6–4 (60%) 5–5 (50%) 96.9 +0.97 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Career — 2117 160.4 +4.01 +3.66 1.175 53.4% +13 -21 -66 65.1% +1.13 89–64 (58%) 61–48 (56%) 106.5 -1.53 — 2226 166.5 +4.45 +3.42 1.200 53.8% +5 +46 -86 66.9% +1.23 128–73 (64%) 90–60 (60%) 108.0 -2.04

Career Rivalries

Each player's five most-played main-draw opponents. The current matchup is highlighted when it appears in a player's top five.