H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Samantha Stosur vs Kai-Chen Chang H2H: 1-1
Samantha Stosur and Kai-Chen Chang are tied 1–1 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on hard courts. Most recently, Samantha Stosur won the 2013 Australian Open first round 7-6(3) 6-3.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
AUS
Age 42
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
TPE
Right-Handed
167 cm / 5'6"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 16, 2013* | Australian Open | Grand Slam | R128 | Hard | Samantha Stosur | 7-6(3) 6-3 | Kai-Chen Chang | Match data |
| Oct 13, 2012* | Osaka | WTA 250 | SF | Hard | Kai-Chen Chang | 6-4 4-6 7-6(3) | Samantha Stosur | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Samantha Stosur | #531 | #4 | 6,195 | 2,068 | 451 | 335 | 57.4% | 1 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 4 | 9 |
| Kai-Chen Chang | #1,233 | #82 | 808 | 1,647 | 32 | 59 | 35.2% | 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.
| Samantha Stosur | Kai-Chen Chang | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles |
| 2002 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #245 | 1,475 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 5–5 | 50.0% | #94 | 1,558 | 0 | 0 |
| 2003 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #163 | 1,492 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 9–15 | 37.5% | #117 | 1,564 | 0 | 0 |
| 2004 | 17–16 | 51.5% | #65 | 1,609 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 1–8 | 11.1% | #148 | 1,487 | 0 | 0 |
| 2005 | 18–22 | 45.0% | #46 | 1,607 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 9–11 | 45.0% | #86 | 1,579 | 0 | 0 |
| 2006 | 29–24 | 54.7% | #29 | 1,749 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #621 | 1,532 | 0 | 0 |
| 2007 | 15–15 | 50.0% | #46 | 1,723 | 0 | 0 | 2015 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #134 | 1,530 | 0 | 0 |
| 2008 | 17–11 | 60.7% | #52 | 1,746 | 0 | 0 | 2016 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #131 | 1,604 | 0 | 0 |
| 2009 | 38–20 | 65.5% | #13 | 1,885 | 0 | 1 | 2017 | 2–9 | 18.2% | #219 | 1,539 | 0 | 0 |
| 2010 | 43–19 | 69.4% | #6 | 1,927 | 0 | 2 | 2018 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #401 | 1,538 | 0 | 0 |
| 2011 | 46–21 | 68.7% | #6 | 1,977 | 1 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2012 | 40–23 | 63.5% | #9 | 1,883 | 1 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2013 | 40–22 | 64.5% | #18 | 1,902 | 1 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2014 | 32–22 | 59.3% | #22 | 1,883 | 1 | 6 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2015 | 34–22 | 60.7% | #27 | 1,789 | 1 | 8 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2016 | 24–19 | 55.8% | #21 | 1,716 | 1 | 8 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2017 | 22–19 | 53.7% | #41 | 1,734 | 1 | 9 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2018 | 17–23 | 42.5% | #74 | 1,663 | 1 | 9 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2019 | 14–16 | 46.7% | #99 | 1,631 | 1 | 9 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2020 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #112 | 1,607 | 1 | 9 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2021 | 1–9 | 10.0% | #382 | 1,522 | 1 | 9 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2022 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #529 | 1,511 | 1 | 9 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |