H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Petra Martic vs Jie Zheng H2H: 0-1
Jie Zheng holds a 1–0 lead over Petra Martic in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Jie Zheng leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Jie Zheng won the 2011 Guangzhou quarterfinal 1-6 6-4 6-3.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
CRO
Age 35
Right-Handed
181 cm / 5'11"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
CHN
Age 43
Right-Handed
164 cm / 5'5"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 24, 2011* | Guangzhou | WTA 250 | QF | Hard | Jie Zheng | 1-6 6-4 6-3 | Petra Martic | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Petra Martic | #349 | #14 | 2,850 | 1,942 | 212 | 214 | 49.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| Jie Zheng | #961 | #15 | 2,745 | 1,898 | 216 | 193 | 52.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 4 |
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 | Petra Martic | Jie Zheng | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | 2007 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #330 | 1,480 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 2008 | 2–1 | 66.7% | #215 | 1,506 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 2009 | 6–7 | 46.2% | #82 | 1,538 | 0 | 0 | 2002 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #185 | 1,507 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2010 | 5–14 | 26.3% | #142 | 1,512 | 0 | 0 | 2003 | 7–8 | 46.7% | #84 | 1,535 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2011 | 16–14 | 53.3% | #50 | 1,613 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 10–17 | 37.0% | #79 | 1,551 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2012 | 18–18 | 50.0% | #59 | 1,690 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 24–15 | 61.5% | #44 | 1,705 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 2013 | 7–12 | 36.8% | #107 | 1,606 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 25–16 | 61.0% | #33 | 1,778 | 0 | 3 |
| 23 | 2014 | 1–8 | 11.1% | #186 | 1,515 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 7–10 | 41.2% | #163 | 1,689 | 0 | 3 |
| 24 | 2015 | 0–8 | 0.0% | #148 | 1,435 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 20–10 | 66.7% | #25 | 1,838 | 0 | 3 |
| 25 | 2016 | 3–3 | 50.0% | #262 | 1,525 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 27–21 | 56.2% | #35 | 1,779 | 0 | 3 |
| 26 | 2017 | 6–4 | 60.0% | #89 | 1,612 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 23–18 | 56.1% | #26 | 1,760 | 0 | 3 |
| 27 | 2018 | 26–17 | 60.5% | #32 | 1,795 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 18–23 | 43.9% | #48 | 1,705 | 0 | 3 |
| 28 | 2019 | 36–17 | 67.9% | #15 | 1,903 | 0 | 1 | 2012 | 25–23 | 52.1% | #26 | 1,658 | 0 | 4 |
| 29 | 2020 | 14–11 | 56.0% | #18 | 1,805 | 0 | 1 | 2013 | 17–17 | 50.0% | #53 | 1,688 | 0 | 4 |
| 30 | 2021 | 15–21 | 41.7% | #54 | 1,658 | 0 | 1 | 2014 | 12–13 | 48.0% | #91 | 1,670 | 0 | 4 |
| 31 | 2022 | 25–17 | 59.5% | #38 | 1,794 | 0 | 2 | 2015 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #962 | 1,648 | 0 | 4 |
| 32 | 2023 | 20–19 | 51.3% | #40 | 1,808 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 2024 | 9–18 | 33.3% | #122 | 1,649 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 34 | 2025 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #209 | 1,611 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |