H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Saisai Zheng vs Monica Puig H2H: 2-0
Saisai Zheng holds a 2–0 lead over Monica Puig in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Saisai Zheng leads 2–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Saisai Zheng won the 2019 Beijing second round 4-6 6-3 7-6(5).
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
2
–
0
2 main draw meetings
PUR
Age 32
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 28, 2019 | Beijing | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard | Saisai Zheng | 4-6 6-3 7-6(5) | Monica Puig | Match data |
| Aug 31, 2016* | US Open | Grand Slam | R128 | Hard | Saisai Zheng | 6-4 6-2 | Monica Puig | 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 |
| Monica Puig | #1,073 | #27 | 1,570 | 1,838 | 128 | 136 | 48.5% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
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 | Monica Puig | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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% | #211 | 1,492 | 0 | 0 |
| 2012 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #138 | 1,484 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #124 | 1,464 | 0 | 0 |
| 2013 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #145 | 1,468 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 13–15 | 46.4% | #56 | 1,571 | 0 | 0 |
| 2014 | 6–6 | 50.0% | #100 | 1,552 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 16–18 | 47.1% | #59 | 1,616 | 0 | 1 |
| 2015 | 9–22 | 29.0% | #72 | 1,496 | 0 | 0 | 2015 | 15–23 | 39.5% | #92 | 1,579 | 0 | 1 |
| 2016 | 12–23 | 34.3% | #85 | 1,529 | 0 | 0 | 2016 | 31–22 | 58.5% | #32 | 1,713 | 0 | 1 |
| 2017 | 5–10 | 33.3% | #93 | 1,613 | 0 | 0 | 2017 | 19–21 | 47.5% | #58 | 1,709 | 0 | 1 |
| 2018 | 10–11 | 47.6% | #38 | 1,669 | 0 | 0 | 2018 | 18–14 | 56.2% | #53 | 1,775 | 0 | 1 |
| 2019 | 21–23 | 47.7% | #42 | 1,749 | 0 | 1 | 2019 | 16–17 | 48.5% | #79 | 1,692 | 0 | 1 |
| 2020 | 6–4 | 60.0% | #41 | 1,767 | 0 | 1 | 2020 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #105 | 1,629 | 0 | 1 |
| 2021 | 10–16 | 38.5% | #79 | 1,687 | 0 | 1 | 2022 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #1073 | 1,625 | 0 | 1 |
| 2024 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #692 | 1,550 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2025 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #692 | 1,493 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |