H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Rosalyn Fairbank vs Hu Na H2H: 2-1
Rosalyn Fairbank holds a 2–1 lead over Hu Na in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Rosalyn Fairbank leads 1–0 on clay and 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Rosalyn Fairbank won the 1989 Newport quarterfinal 7-6 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.
USA
Age 65
Right-Handed
173 cm / 5'8"
H2H
2
–
1
3 main draw meetings
Age 63
173 cm / 5'8"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 22, 1989* | Newport | WTA 250 | QF | Grass | Rosalyn Fairbank | 7-6 6-4 | Hu Na | Match data |
| Oct 28, 1988* | Indianapolis | WTA 250 | R16 | Hard | Hu Na | 6-1 6-1 | Rosalyn Fairbank | Match data |
| Mar 31, 1988* | Tampa | WTA 250 | R32 | Clay | Rosalyn Fairbank | 7-5 6-3 | Hu Na | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rosalyn Fairbank | #325 | #15 | 51 | 1,933 | 336 | 309 | 52.1% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Hu Na | — | — | — | 1,701 | 60 | 94 | 39.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
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 | Rosalyn Fairbank | Hu Na | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 1978 | 3–2 | 60.0% | — | 1,525 | 0 | 0 | 1980 | 2–3 | 40.0% | — | 1,504 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 1979 | 17–10 | 63.0% | — | 1,720 | 0 | 0 | 1981 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,496 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1980 | 22–20 | 52.4% | — | 1,681 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 1981 | 15–22 | 40.5% | — | 1,657 | 0 | 0 | 1983 | 1–3 | 25.0% | — | 1,482 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1982 | 32–21 | 60.4% | — | 1,904 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 22 | 1983 | 24–19 | 55.8% | — | 1,920 | 0 | 1 | 1985 | 6–9 | 40.0% | — | 1,537 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 1984 | 22–26 | 45.8% | #32 | 1,767 | 0 | 1 | 1986 | 11–16 | 40.7% | — | 1,575 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 1985 | 28–23 | 54.9% | #38 | 1,806 | 0 | 1 | 1987 | 17–18 | 48.6% | — | 1,654 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 1986 | 23–20 | 53.5% | #28 | 1,824 | 0 | 1 | 1988 | 8–18 | 30.8% | — | 1,584 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 1987 | 21–20 | 51.2% | #36 | 1,756 | 0 | 1 | 1989 | 8–13 | 38.1% | — | 1,577 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 1988 | 27–22 | 55.1% | #37 | 1,775 | 0 | 1 | 1990 | 7–12 | 36.8% | — | 1,560 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 1989 | 27–18 | 60.0% | #22 | 1,846 | 0 | 1 | 1991 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,541 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 1990 | 26–20 | 56.5% | #24 | 1,789 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 1991 | 14–19 | 42.4% | #90 | 1,637 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 1992 | 16–16 | 50.0% | #46 | 1,728 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 1993 | 17–19 | 47.2% | #63 | 1,766 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 1994 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #284 | 1,704 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 34 | 1995 | 2–8 | 20.0% | #261 | 1,599 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |