H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Qiang Wang vs Alison Riske-Amritraj H2H: 0-3
Alison Riske-Amritraj holds a 3–0 lead over Qiang Wang in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Alison Riske-Amritraj leads 3–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Alison Riske-Amritraj won the 2019 Wuhan fourth round 6-2 6-1.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
CHN
Right-Handed
172 cm / 5'8"
H2H
0
–
3
3 main draw meetings
USA
Age 36
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 26, 2019* | Wuhan | WTA 1000 | R16 | Hard | Alison Riske-Amritraj | 6-2 6-1 | Qiang Wang | Match data |
| Jan 3, 2019* | Shenzhen | WTA 250 | R32 | Hard | Alison Riske-Amritraj | 6-3 6-3 | Qiang Wang | Match data |
| Jan 4, 2018* | Shenzhen | WTA 250 | R32 | Hard | Alison Riske-Amritraj | 7-5 6-0 | Qiang Wang | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Qiang Wang | #421 | #12 | 2,946 | 1,925 | 128 | 125 | 50.6% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| Alison Riske-Amritraj | #1,157 | #18 | 2,360 | 1,853 | 191 | 202 | 48.6% | 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.
| Qiang Wang | Alison Riske-Amritraj | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles |
| 2012 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #185 | 1,458 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 4–4 | 50.0% | #115 | 1,554 | 0 | 0 |
| 2013 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #226 | 1,474 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 3–8 | 27.3% | #136 | 1,529 | 0 | 0 |
| 2014 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #102 | 1,467 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #180 | 1,488 | 0 | 0 |
| 2015 | 4–14 | 22.2% | #110 | 1,448 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 11–6 | 64.7% | #57 | 1,642 | 0 | 0 |
| 2016 | 9–11 | 45.0% | #72 | 1,568 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 24–22 | 52.2% | #43 | 1,713 | 0 | 1 |
| 2017 | 24–19 | 55.8% | #45 | 1,724 | 0 | 0 | 2015 | 15–24 | 38.5% | #97 | 1,602 | 0 | 1 |
| 2018 | 37–21 | 63.8% | #21 | 1,900 | 0 | 2 | 2016 | 23–19 | 54.8% | #39 | 1,742 | 0 | 1 |
| 2019 | 23–18 | 56.1% | #30 | 1,797 | 0 | 2 | 2017 | 21–24 | 46.7% | #70 | 1,650 | 0 | 1 |
| 2020 | 7–6 | 53.8% | #34 | 1,770 | 0 | 2 | 2018 | 17–16 | 51.5% | #62 | 1,632 | 0 | 1 |
| 2021 | 9–13 | 40.9% | #104 | 1,713 | 0 | 2 | 2019 | 26–23 | 53.1% | #18 | 1,797 | 0 | 2 |
| 2022 | 13–13 | 50.0% | #91 | 1,716 | 0 | 2 | 2020 | 6–8 | 42.9% | #26 | 1,739 | 0 | 2 |
| 2024 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #376 | 1,624 | 0 | 2 | 2021 | 16–15 | 51.6% | #51 | 1,771 | 0 | 3 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2022 | 25–21 | 54.3% | #41 | 1,750 | 0 | 3 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2023 | 0–8 | 0.0% | #659 | 1,614 | 0 | 3 |