H2H data updated: 2026-08-08 02:15 UTC
Na Li vs Tamira Paszek H2H: 2-0
Na Li holds a 2–0 lead over Tamira Paszek in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Na Li leads 1–0 on grass and 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Na Li won the 2011 Eastbourne third round 7-5 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.
CHN
Age 44
Right-Handed
172 cm / 5'8"
H2H
2
–
0
2 main draw meetings
AUT
Age 35
Right-Handed
165 cm / 5'5"
H2H Match Log
| Winner | Score | Loser | Match Data | Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Na Li | 7-5 6-4 | Tamira Paszek | Match data | Jun 16, 2011* | Eastbourne | WTA 500 | R32 | Grass |
| Na Li | 6-2 6-0 | Tamira Paszek | Match data | Mar 21, 2007* | Miami | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard |
* 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Na Li | #9 | #2 | 7,585 | 2,117 | 338 | 159 | 68.0% | 2 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 9 |
| Tamira Paszek | #446 | #299 | 230 | 1,782 | 100 | 129 | 43.7% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
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 | Tamira Paszek | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 14 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2005 | 1–1 | 50.0% | — | 1,512 | 0 | 0 |
| 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2006 | 6–2 | 75.0% | — | 1,599 | 0 | 1 |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2007 | 15–14 | 51.7% | — | 1,730 | 0 | 1 |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2008 | 16–18 | 47.1% | — | 1,697 | 0 | 1 |
| 18 | 2000 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #136 | 1,496 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 5–9 | 35.7% | — | 1,626 | 0 | 1 |
| 19 | 2001 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #302 | 1,480 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 9–9 | 50.0% | — | 1,642 | 0 | 2 |
| 20 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2011 | 19–21 | 47.5% | — | 1,654 | 0 | 2 |
| 21 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2012 | 18–21 | 46.2% | — | 1,676 | 0 | 3 |
| 22 | 2004 | 6–1 | 85.7% | #78 | 1,599 | 0 | 1 | 2013 | 2–17 | 10.5% | — | 1,476 | 0 | 3 |
| 23 | 2005 | 23–14 | 62.2% | #56 | 1,710 | 0 | 1 | 2014 | 1–4 | 20.0% | — | 1,469 | 0 | 3 |
| 24 | 2006 | 36–22 | 62.1% | #21 | 1,818 | 0 | 1 | 2015 | 1–4 | 20.0% | — | 1,442 | 0 | 3 |
| 25 | 2007 | 22–12 | 64.7% | #29 | 1,819 | 0 | 1 | 2016 | 7–9 | 43.8% | — | 1,519 | 0 | 3 |
| 26 | 2008 | 28–14 | 66.7% | #23 | 1,863 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 27 | 2009 | 35–17 | 67.3% | #15 | 1,938 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 2010 | 36–20 | 64.3% | #11 | 1,849 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 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 | 2,028 | 2 | 9 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |