H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Saisai Zheng vs Camila Giorgi H2H: 0-1
Camila Giorgi holds a 1–0 lead over Saisai Zheng in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Camila Giorgi leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Camila Giorgi won the 2017 Shenzhen fourth round 6-7(5) 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
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
ITA
Age 34
Right-Handed
168 cm / 5'6"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 5, 2017* | Shenzhen | WTA 250 | R16 | Hard | Camila Giorgi | 6-7(5) 7-5 6-4 | Saisai Zheng | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Saisai Zheng | #692 | #34 | 1,585 | 1,776 | 83 | 130 | 39.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Camila Giorgi | #116 | #26 | 1,978 | 1,875 | 204 | 184 | 52.6% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 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.
| Saisai Zheng | Camila Giorgi | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles |
| 2011 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #276 | 1,473 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #151 | 1,486 | 0 | 0 |
| 2012 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #138 | 1,484 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 6–10 | 37.5% | #75 | 1,524 | 0 | 0 |
| 2013 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #145 | 1,468 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 8–11 | 42.1% | #98 | 1,579 | 0 | 0 |
| 2014 | 6–6 | 50.0% | #100 | 1,552 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 27–19 | 58.7% | #34 | 1,710 | 0 | 0 |
| 2015 | 9–22 | 29.0% | #72 | 1,496 | 0 | 0 | 2015 | 26–21 | 55.3% | #35 | 1,730 | 0 | 1 |
| 2016 | 12–23 | 34.3% | #85 | 1,529 | 0 | 0 | 2016 | 14–19 | 42.4% | #82 | 1,638 | 0 | 1 |
| 2017 | 5–10 | 33.3% | #93 | 1,613 | 0 | 0 | 2017 | 15–12 | 55.6% | #78 | 1,778 | 0 | 1 |
| 2018 | 10–11 | 47.6% | #38 | 1,669 | 0 | 0 | 2018 | 28–15 | 65.1% | #26 | 1,865 | 0 | 2 |
| 2019 | 21–23 | 47.7% | #42 | 1,749 | 0 | 1 | 2019 | 12–15 | 44.4% | #100 | 1,725 | 0 | 2 |
| 2020 | 6–4 | 60.0% | #41 | 1,767 | 0 | 1 | 2020 | 10–9 | 52.6% | #76 | 1,726 | 0 | 2 |
| 2021 | 10–16 | 38.5% | #79 | 1,687 | 0 | 1 | 2021 | 21–16 | 56.8% | #33 | 1,799 | 0 | 3 |
| 2024 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #692 | 1,550 | 0 | 1 | 2022 | 14–16 | 46.7% | #66 | 1,763 | 0 | 3 |
| 2025 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #692 | 1,493 | 0 | 1 | 2023 | 20–15 | 57.1% | #53 | 1,788 | 0 | 4 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2024 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #116 | 1,760 | 0 | 4 |