H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Shuai Peng vs Elena Dementieva H2H: 1-2
Elena Dementieva holds a 2–1 lead over Shuai Peng in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on hard courts, while Elena Dementieva leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Elena Dementieva won the 2010 Luxembourg third round 7-5 7-6(3).
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
CHN
Age 40
Right-Handed
177 cm / 5'10"
H2H
1
–
2
3 main draw meetings
RUS
Age 44
Right-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 21, 2010* | Luxembourg | WTA 250 | R32 | Hard | Elena Dementieva | 7-5 7-6(3) | Shuai Peng | Match data |
| May 18, 2006* | Rome | WTA 1000 | R32 | Clay | Elena Dementieva | (w/o) | Shuai Peng | Match data |
| Aug 4, 2005* | San Diego | WTA 1000 | R32 | Hard | Shuai Peng | 7-5 6-4 | Elena Dementieva | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Shuai Peng | #820 | #14 | 2,825 | 1,890 | 300 | 258 | 53.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| Elena Dementieva | #10 | #3 | 8,286 | 2,108 | 472 | 243 | 66.0% | 0 | 3 | 0 | 9 | 3 | 15 |
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 | Shuai Peng | Elena Dementieva | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 15 | 2001 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #518 | 1,493 | 0 | 0 | 1997 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #349 | 1,492 | 0 | 0 |
| 16 | 2002 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #366 | 1,484 | 0 | 0 | 1998 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #186 | 1,478 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 2003 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #221 | 1,455 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 11–11 | 50.0% | #62 | 1,584 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2004 | 5–4 | 55.6% | #80 | 1,516 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 33–19 | 63.5% | #11 | 1,859 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2005 | 20–16 | 55.6% | #36 | 1,678 | 0 | 0 | 2001 | 34–22 | 60.7% | #15 | 1,833 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2006 | 18–17 | 51.4% | #55 | 1,727 | 0 | 0 | 2002 | 36–26 | 58.1% | #19 | 1,763 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2007 | 19–17 | 52.8% | #45 | 1,737 | 0 | 0 | 2003 | 47–25 | 65.3% | #8 | 1,966 | 0 | 3 |
| 22 | 2008 | 24–22 | 52.2% | #40 | 1,706 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 40–22 | 64.5% | #6 | 1,986 | 0 | 4 |
| 23 | 2009 | 23–22 | 51.1% | #46 | 1,770 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 41–22 | 65.1% | #8 | 1,925 | 0 | 4 |
| 24 | 2010 | 15–13 | 53.6% | #72 | 1,742 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 45–21 | 68.2% | #8 | 1,908 | 0 | 6 |
| 25 | 2011 | 48–23 | 67.6% | #17 | 1,817 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 41–18 | 69.5% | #11 | 1,964 | 0 | 8 |
| 26 | 2012 | 21–22 | 48.8% | #40 | 1,699 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 50–17 | 74.6% | #4 | 2,014 | 0 | 10 |
| 27 | 2013 | 18–18 | 50.0% | #42 | 1,657 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 55–18 | 75.3% | #5 | 1,981 | 0 | 13 |
| 28 | 2014 | 28–22 | 56.0% | #21 | 1,743 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 39–19 | 67.2% | #9 | 1,928 | 0 | 15 |
| 29 | 2015 | 6–7 | 46.2% | #137 | 1,698 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 2016 | 8–10 | 44.4% | #84 | 1,711 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 2017 | 37–21 | 63.8% | #27 | 1,815 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 2018 | 1–8 | 11.1% | #125 | 1,741 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 2019 | 7–9 | 43.8% | #109 | 1,679 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 34 | 2020 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #117 | 1,636 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |