H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 16:30 UTC
Saisai Zheng vs Petra Kvitova H2H: 1-0
Saisai Zheng holds a 1–0 lead over Petra Kvitova in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Saisai Zheng leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Saisai Zheng won the 2016 Shenzhen third round 6-2 0-0 RET.
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
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
CZE
Age 36
Left-Handed
182 cm / 6'0"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 7, 2016* | Shenzhen | WTA 250 | R32 | Hard | Saisai Zheng | 6-2 0-0 (ret.) | Petra Kvitova | 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 |
| Petra Kvitova | #450 | #2 | 7,690 | 2,073 | 501 | 258 | 66.0% | 2 | 10 | 2 | 14 | 3 | 31 |
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 | Petra Kvitova | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 2007 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #150 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 |
| 2012 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #138 | 1,484 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 13–14 | 48.1% | #50 | 1,607 | 0 | 0 |
| 2013 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #145 | 1,468 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 18–16 | 52.9% | #61 | 1,700 | 0 | 1 |
| 2014 | 6–6 | 50.0% | #100 | 1,552 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 17–20 | 45.9% | #34 | 1,699 | 0 | 1 |
| 2015 | 9–22 | 29.0% | #72 | 1,496 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 50–11 | 82.0% | #2 | 2,058 | 1 | 7 |
| 2016 | 12–23 | 34.3% | #85 | 1,529 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 38–15 | 71.7% | #8 | 1,961 | 1 | 9 |
| 2017 | 5–10 | 33.3% | #93 | 1,613 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 49–22 | 69.0% | #6 | 1,966 | 1 | 11 |
| 2018 | 10–11 | 47.6% | #38 | 1,669 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 41–17 | 70.7% | #4 | 1,989 | 2 | 14 |
| 2019 | 21–23 | 47.7% | #42 | 1,749 | 0 | 1 | 2015 | 35–16 | 68.6% | #6 | 1,907 | 2 | 17 |
| 2020 | 6–4 | 60.0% | #41 | 1,767 | 0 | 1 | 2016 | 41–19 | 68.3% | #11 | 1,966 | 2 | 19 |
| 2021 | 10–16 | 38.5% | #79 | 1,687 | 0 | 1 | 2017 | 18–10 | 64.3% | #29 | 1,894 | 2 | 20 |
| 2024 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #692 | 1,550 | 0 | 1 | 2018 | 42–17 | 71.2% | #7 | 1,887 | 2 | 25 |
| 2025 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #692 | 1,493 | 0 | 1 | 2019 | 33–16 | 67.3% | #7 | 1,897 | 2 | 27 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2020 | 20–7 | 74.1% | #8 | 1,947 | 2 | 27 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2021 | 28–17 | 62.2% | #17 | 1,881 | 2 | 28 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2022 | 28–19 | 59.6% | #16 | 1,920 | 2 | 29 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2023 | 29–13 | 69.0% | #14 | 1,931 | 2 | 31 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2025 | 1–8 | 11.1% | — | 1,773 | 2 | 31 |