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

Na Li vs Lourdes Domínguez Lino H2H: 2-0

Na Li holds a 2–0 lead over Lourdes Domínguez Lino in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Na Li leads 1–0 on clay and 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Na Li won the 2011 Italian Open round of 32 6-4 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
2 – 0
2 main-draw meetings
Lourdes Domínguez Lino
Spain Age 45 Right-Handed 163 cm / 5'4"

H2H Match Log

PlayerScorePlayerMatch DataDateRoundTournamentCategorySurface
Na Li #6 6-4 6-2 Lourdes Domínguez Lino #46 Match data May 12, 2011* R32 Italian Open Premier 5 → modern equivalent WTA 1000 Clay
Na Li #16 6-0 6-2 Lourdes Domínguez Lino #56 Match data Jan 18, 2007* R64 Australian Open Grand Slam 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
Lourdes Domínguez Lino #1,129 #40 1,305 1,673 125 157 44.3% 0 0 0 0 2 2

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 Lourdes Domínguez Lino
YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles
18 2000 1–3 25.0% #136 1,496 0 0 — — — — — — —
19 2001 0–1 0.0% #302 1,480 0 0 2000 0–1 0.0% #141 1,489 0 0
20 — — — — — — — 2001 0–1 0.0% #378 1,479 0 0
21 — — — — — — — 2002 4–3 57.1% #390 1,518 0 0
22 2004 6–1 85.7% #78 1,599 0 1 2003 0–1 0.0% #319 1,503 0 0
23 2005 23–14 62.2% #56 1,710 0 1 2004 1–1 50.0% #208 1,508 0 0
24 2006 36–22 62.1% #21 1,818 0 1 2005 6–4 60.0% #72 1,553 0 0
25 2007 22–12 64.7% #29 1,819 0 1 2006 21–19 52.5% #52 1,623 0 1
26 2008 28–14 66.7% #23 1,863 0 2 2007 16–21 43.2% #71 1,557 0 1
27 2009 35–17 67.3% #15 1,938 0 2 2008 6–11 35.3% #91 1,507 0 1
28 2010 36–20 64.3% #11 1,849 0 3 2009 6–13 31.6% #134 1,477 0 1
29 2011 33–17 66.0% #5 1,862 1 5 2010 2–4 33.3% #85 1,487 0 1
30 2012 43–17 71.7% #7 1,999 1 6 2011 16–16 50.0% #79 1,574 0 2
31 2013 46–14 76.7% #3 2,067 1 7 2012 16–16 50.0% #48 1,652 0 2
32 2014 29–7 80.6% #9 2,024 2 9 2013 17–22 43.6% #69 1,620 0 2
33 — — — — — — — 2014 7–11 38.9% #110 1,568 0 2
34 — — — — — — — 2015 4–5 44.4% #100 1,550 0 2
35 — — — — — — — 2016 3–8 27.3% #220 1,516 0 2

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 Lourdes Domínguez Lino
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 %
18 2000 1 3 4 25.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
19 2001 0 1 1 0.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — 2000 — — — — 0 1 1 0.0% — — — — — — — —
20 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 2001 — — — — 0 1 1 0.0% — — — — — — — —
21 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 2002 — — — — 4 3 7 57.1% — — — — — — — —
22 2004 6 1 7 85.7% — — — — — — — — — — — — 2003 — — — — 0 1 1 0.0% — — — — — — — —
23 2005 16 12 28 57.1% 7 2 9 77.8% — — — — — — — — 2004 — — — — 1 1 2 50.0% — — — — — — — —
24 2006 18 14 32 56.3% 12 4 16 75.0% 6 3 9 66.7% 0 1 1 0.0% 2005 — — — — 6 4 10 60.0% — — — — — — — —
25 2007 13 5 18 72.2% 6 5 11 54.5% 2 1 3 66.7% 1 1 2 50.0% 2006 7 10 17 41.2% 14 8 22 63.6% 0 1 1 0.0% — — — —
26 2008 26 12 38 68.4% — — — — 2 2 4 50.0% — — — — 2007 3 9 12 25.0% 13 11 24 54.2% 0 1 1 0.0% — — — —
27 2009 22 9 31 71.0% 5 4 9 55.6% 7 3 10 70.0% 1 1 2 50.0% 2008 0 4 4 0.0% 6 7 13 46.2% — — — — — — — —
28 2010 17 14 31 54.8% 10 4 14 71.4% 9 2 11 81.8% — — — — 2009 1 3 4 25.0% 5 9 14 35.7% 0 1 1 0.0% — — — —
29 2011 16 12 28 57.1% 15 3 18 83.3% 2 2 4 50.0% — — — — 2010 2 2 4 50.0% 0 2 2 0.0% — — — — — — — —
30 2012 30 10 40 75.0% 12 4 16 75.0% 1 2 3 33.3% 0 1 1 0.0% 2011 3 6 9 33.3% 11 8 19 57.9% 2 2 4 50.0% — — — —
31 2013 35 8 43 81.4% 5 4 9 55.6% 6 2 8 75.0% — — — — 2012 10 8 18 55.6% 5 7 12 41.7% 1 1 2 50.0% — — — —
32 2014 22 3 25 88.0% 5 3 8 62.5% 2 1 3 66.7% — — — — 2013 1 8 9 11.1% 16 11 27 59.3% 0 2 2 0.0% 0 1 1 0.0%
33 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 2014 0 5 5 0.0% 6 5 11 54.5% 1 1 2 50.0% — — — —
34 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 2015 0 1 1 0.0% 4 4 8 50.0% — — — — — — — —
35 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 2016 0 3 3 0.0% 3 5 8 37.5% — — — — — — — —
Career — 222 104 326 68.1% 77 33 110 70.0% 37 18 55 67.3% 2 4 6 33.3% — 27 59 86 31.4% 94 88 182 51.6% 4 9 13 30.8% 0 1 1 0.0%

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 Lourdes Domínguez Lino
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
18 2000 1497 107.1 — — — — +34 — — 14.3% -2.14 0–1 — — -0.21 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
19 2001 1481 95.3 — — — — — — — 0.0% -4.00 — — — +0.12 2000 1489 98.2 — — — — — — — 33.3% -2.33 0–1 1–0 — -0.06
20 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 2001 1480 100.7 — — — — — — — 0.0% -3.50 — — — -0.06
21 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 2002 1519 112.4 — — — — — +41 — 57.1% +0.14 — 2–1 (67%) — +0.22
22 2004 1600 125.7 — — — — +18 — — 81.3% +1.81 1–1 2–1 (67%) — +0.22 2003 1503 98.5 — — — — — — — 0.0% -3.00 — — — +0.07
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 2004 1509 105.8 — — — — — — — 50.0% +1.34 1–1 0–1 — +0.01
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 2005 1553 117.7 — — — — — +72 — 61.9% +0.38 0–1 3–1 (75%) — +0.23
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 2006 1623 121.0 — — — — -68 +93 — 51.2% -0.30 4–4 (50%) 5–3 (63%) 102.8 +0.22
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 2007 1558 113.3 — — — — -56 +110 — 43.2% -0.49 4–3 (57%) 2–2 (50%) 100.6 -0.29
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 2008 1508 107.1 — — — — -48 +107 — 37.8% -1.11 1–4 (20%) 1–0 — -0.03
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 2009 1477 108.0 — — — — -35 +83 — 37.8% -0.82 2–5 (29%) 2–5 (29%) 95.2 +0.87
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 2010 1487 102.6 — — — — 0 — — 35.7% -1.36 1–1 0–1 — +0.13
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 2011 1575 121.5 — — — — -73 0 +20 50.0% +0.11 6–6 (50%) 1–7 (13%) 95.2 +0.42
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 2012 1653 124.6 — — — — -17 -96 — 54.3% +0.04 2–6 (25%) 4–1 (80%) 100.6 0.00
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 2013 1620 121.2 — — — — -86 +113 — 41.3% -0.81 10–8 (56%) 2–3 (40%) 103.9 -1.33
33 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 2014 1569 107.5 — — — — -102 +137 — 40.0% -0.89 1–0 1–2 (33%) — +0.57
34 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 2015 1550 113.7 -1.03 +0.35 0.984 50.1% — +126 — 50.0% -0.05 1–3 (25%) 2–0 — +0.51
35 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 2016 1517 97.5 -3.20 -2.29 0.761 44.1% -86 +117 — 25.0% -1.75 2–2 (50%) 0–2 — -0.18
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 — 1674 120.0 -2.29 -1.18 0.851 46.6% -55 +78 +20 45.2% -0.48 35–45 (44%) 26–29 (47%) 98.8 +0.46

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.