H2H data updated: 2026-09-13 00:00 UTC

Na Li vs Shahar Peer H2H: 2-2

Na Li and Shahar Peer are tied 2–2 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 4 main-draw meetings, Na Li leads 2–1 on hard courts, while Shahar Peer leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Shahar Peer won the 2010 Madrid Open quarterfinal 6-4 3-6 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.

Na Li
CHN Age 44 Right-Handed 172 cm / 5'8"
H2H
2 – 2
4 main-draw meetings
Shahar Peer
ISR Age 39 Right-Handed 170 cm / 5'7"

H2H Match Log

PlayerScorePlayerMatch DataDateRoundTournamentCategorySurface
Shahar Peer #22 6-4 3-6 6-4 Na Li #13 Match data May 14, 2010* QF Madrid Open Premier Mandatory → modern equivalent WTA 1000 Clay
Shahar Peer #22 7-5 3-0 (ret.) Na Li #10 Match data Feb 19, 2010* QF Dubai Tennis Championships Premier 5 → modern equivalent WTA 1000 Hard
Na Li #36 2-6 6-0 6-1 Shahar Peer #25 Match data Aug 27, 2008* R128 US Open Grand Slam Hard
Na Li #29 6-1 6-3 Shahar Peer #17 Match data Feb 22, 2008* R16 Qatar Open Tier I → 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
Shahar Peer #1,185 #11 3,410 1,969 269 206 56.6% 0 0 0 0 5 5

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 Shahar Peer
YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles
17 — — — — — — — 2004 3–3 50.0% #176 1,510 0 0
18 2000 1–3 25.0% #136 1,496 0 0 2005 22–20 52.4% #45 1,635 0 0
19 2001 0–1 0.0% #302 1,480 0 0 2006 38–20 65.5% #20 1,828 0 3
20 — — — — — — — 2007 39–21 65.0% #17 1,833 0 3
21 — — — — — — — 2008 25–21 54.3% #38 1,710 0 3
22 2004 6–1 85.7% #78 1,599 0 1 2009 36–21 63.2% #30 1,788 0 5
23 2005 23–14 62.2% #56 1,710 0 1 2010 47–21 69.1% #13 1,888 0 5
24 2006 36–22 62.1% #21 1,818 0 1 2011 23–21 52.3% #37 1,708 0 5
25 2007 22–12 64.7% #29 1,819 0 1 2012 15–23 39.5% #74 1,585 0 5
26 2008 28–14 66.7% #23 1,863 0 2 2013 10–14 41.7% #77 1,559 0 5
27 2009 35–17 67.3% #15 1,938 0 2 2014 10–18 35.7% #117 1,539 0 5
28 2010 36–20 64.3% #11 1,849 0 3 2015 1–3 25.0% #177 1,527 0 5
29 2011 33–17 66.0% #5 1,862 1 5 — — — — — — —
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 Shahar Peer
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 %
17 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 2004 3 3 6 50.0% — — — — — — — — — — — —
18 2000 1 3 4 25.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — 2005 16 13 29 55.2% 5 5 10 50.0% 1 2 3 33.3% — — — —
19 2001 0 1 1 0.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — 2006 22 14 36 61.1% 14 3 17 82.4% 1 2 3 33.3% 1 1 2 50.0%
20 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 2007 29 14 43 67.4% 6 4 10 60.0% 4 2 6 66.7% 0 1 1 0.0%
21 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 2008 20 15 35 57.1% 2 4 6 33.3% 3 2 5 60.0% — — — —
22 2004 6 1 7 85.7% — — — — — — — — — — — — 2009 28 14 42 66.7% 7 6 13 53.8% 1 1 2 50.0% — — — —
23 2005 16 12 28 57.1% 7 2 9 77.8% — — — — — — — — 2010 32 14 46 69.6% 12 4 16 75.0% 1 2 3 33.3% 2 1 3 66.7%
24 2006 18 14 32 56.3% 12 4 16 75.0% 6 3 9 66.7% 0 1 1 0.0% 2011 20 14 34 58.8% 3 5 8 37.5% 0 2 2 0.0% — — — —
25 2007 13 5 18 72.2% 6 5 11 54.5% 2 1 3 66.7% 1 1 2 50.0% 2012 8 11 19 42.1% 6 8 14 42.9% 1 3 4 25.0% 0 1 1 0.0%
26 2008 26 12 38 68.4% — — — — 2 2 4 50.0% — — — — 2013 6 9 15 40.0% 4 5 9 44.4% — — — — — — — —
27 2009 22 9 31 71.0% 5 4 9 55.6% 7 3 10 70.0% 1 1 2 50.0% 2014 7 13 20 35.0% 2 3 5 40.0% 1 2 3 33.3% — — — —
28 2010 17 14 31 54.8% 10 4 14 71.4% 9 2 11 81.8% — — — — 2015 0 2 2 0.0% 1 1 2 50.0% — — — — — — — —
29 2011 16 12 28 57.1% 15 3 18 83.3% 2 2 4 50.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
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% — 191 136 327 58.4% 62 48 110 56.4% 13 18 31 41.9% 3 4 7 42.9%

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 370/469 of Shahar Peer'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 Shahar Peer
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%
18 — —/— — — — — — — — — — 2005 5/42 1.4 4.4 55.4% 58.1% 41.3% 58.7% 48.3% 50.7% 44.8%
19 — —/— — — — — — — — — — 2006 30/58 1.1 3.6 64.3% 60.8% 44.2% 51.0% 52.2% 54.9% 47.0%
20 — —/— — — — — — — — — — 2007 58/60 1.3 2.8 66.3% 63.0% 48.5% 53.0% 52.1% 58.4% 47.4%
21 — —/— — — — — — — — — — 2008 37/46 1.1 2.6 68.0% 61.7% 44.5% 47.6% 45.8% 56.2% 46.1%
22 — —/— — — — — — — — — — 2009 48/57 1.5 2.1 65.2% 61.3% 47.9% 52.4% 48.8% 56.5% 47.1%
23 2005 2/37 1.5 3.5 71.4% 54.3% 62.6% 49.2% 41.7% 56.3% 43.6% 2010 63/68 1.5 3.1 64.4% 64.7% 46.9% 55.5% 49.4% 58.4% 45.9%
24 2006 36/58 1.9 2.3 71.1% 61.5% 49.3% 51.6% 50.5% 57.6% 45.2% 2011 41/44 1.2 3.0 63.5% 60.5% 43.0% 50.2% 46.0% 54.1% 42.9%
25 2007 33/34 1.5 2.0 71.5% 62.4% 51.9% 52.6% 45.7% 59.2% 46.2% 2012 35/38 1.2 3.5 63.2% 59.5% 42.5% 41.1% 48.8% 53.4% 44.7%
26 2008 32/42 2.2 3.9 66.3% 63.4% 48.3% 58.5% 51.1% 58.2% 46.8% 2013 23/24 0.6 3.2 64.9% 57.9% 42.9% 54.5% 48.3% 52.4% 45.5%
27 2009 47/52 2.1 2.9 63.9% 65.4% 51.1% 45.7% 50.4% 59.9% 46.1% 2014 26/28 0.8 4.7 62.5% 59.2% 39.5% 44.3% 48.8% 51.9% 45.1%
28 2010 48/56 2.3 2.9 68.5% 65.7% 49.2% 50.4% 51.7% 60.4% 47.3% 2015 4/4 0.8 3.3 63.6% 52.0% 42.6% 26.5% 60.4% 48.4% 37.1%
29 2011 39/50 2.1 3.2 69.1% 64.4% 47.3% 54.6% 51.5% 59.1% 45.2% — —/— — — — — — — — — —
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% — 370/475 1.2 3.1 64.7% 61.4% 45.1% 50.5% 49.2% 55.7% 45.8%

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 Shahar Peer
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
17 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 2004 1510 102.5 — — — — +18 — — 53.8% -0.08 0–1 — — +0.42
18 2000 1497 107.1 — — — — +34 — — 14.3% -2.14 0–1 — — -0.21 2005 1636 124.9 -1.60 +0.29 0.910 48.0% -10 -58 -78 51.0% -0.03 10–8 (56%) 3–4 (43%) 102.4 -0.40
19 2001 1481 95.3 — — — — — — — 0.0% -4.00 — — — +0.12 2006 1829 146.6 -0.62 +1.81 1.042 50.8% -41 -7 -266 61.9% +1.04 11–7 (61%) 9–9 (50%) 104.4 +0.31
20 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 2007 1833 153.0 +2.29 +3.68 1.138 52.8% +7 +25 -154 63.6% +0.84 6–8 (43%) 9–4 (69%) 101.8 +0.52
21 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 2008 1710 132.5 +0.71 +1.58 1.054 51.1% +42 +32 0 52.0% +0.17 7–5 (58%) 4–5 (44%) 98.3 0.00
22 2004 1600 125.7 — — — — +18 — — 81.3% +1.81 1–1 2–1 (67%) — +0.22 2009 1789 138.4 +1.20 +2.73 1.084 52.0% +30 -85 — 60.5% +0.76 9–4 (69%) 8–2 (80%) 108.3 -0.03
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 2010 1888 152.7 +2.81 +2.91 1.104 52.2% -10 -19 -200 62.7% +0.97 14–4 (78%) 5–6 (45%) 106.9 -0.29
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 2011 1708 130.0 -0.93 -0.58 0.936 48.7% +54 +67 — 49.5% -0.07 9–4 (69%) 4–4 (50%) 101.2 +1.40
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 2012 1586 125.7 -1.37 +0.83 0.959 49.0% +71 +119 +14 41.3% -0.51 1–9 (10%) 2–5 (29%) 86.0 -0.53
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 2013 1559 108.2 -2.36 -0.25 0.955 49.0% +34 +89 — 41.8% -0.56 4–3 (57%) 3–0 (100%) — +1.54
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 2014 1539 108.9 -3.44 +0.83 0.938 48.5% +5 +83 +40 40.3% -0.91 4–7 (36%) 4–0 (100%) 99.7 -0.24
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 2015 1527 104.5 -1.91 -2.82 0.718 42.6% — — — 22.2% -2.22 1–0 0–2 — -0.28
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 2016 1478 88.7 — — — — — — — — — — — — —
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 — 1969 140.8 +0.35 +1.76 1.032 50.7% +14 +16 -88 54.5% +0.32 76–60 (56%) 51–41 (55%) 103.9 +0.51

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.