H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Shuai Peng vs Karin Knapp H2H: 1-0
Shuai Peng holds a 1–0 lead over Karin Knapp in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Shuai Peng leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Shuai Peng won the 2008 Indian Wells second round 6-1 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
–
0
1 main draw meetings
ITA
Age 39
Right-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 12, 2008* | Indian Wells | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard | Shuai Peng | 6-1 6-3 | Karin Knapp | 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 |
| Karin Knapp | #971 | #33 | 1,420 | 1,712 | 103 | 117 | 46.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
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 | Karin Knapp | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 16 | 2002 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #366 | 1,484 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 2003 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #221 | 1,455 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 2004 | 5–4 | 55.6% | #80 | 1,516 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 2005 | 20–16 | 55.6% | #36 | 1,678 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #122 | 1,513 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2006 | 18–17 | 51.4% | #55 | 1,727 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 14–14 | 50.0% | #50 | 1,587 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2007 | 19–17 | 52.8% | #45 | 1,737 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 11–14 | 44.0% | #80 | 1,601 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2008 | 24–22 | 52.2% | #40 | 1,706 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 3–6 | 33.3% | #205 | 1,554 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2009 | 23–22 | 51.1% | #46 | 1,770 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 24 | 2010 | 15–13 | 53.6% | #72 | 1,742 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #164 | 1,529 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2011 | 48–23 | 67.6% | #17 | 1,817 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 7–7 | 50.0% | #120 | 1,561 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2012 | 21–22 | 48.8% | #40 | 1,699 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 20–15 | 57.1% | #41 | 1,681 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2013 | 18–18 | 50.0% | #42 | 1,657 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 18–24 | 42.9% | #54 | 1,646 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2014 | 28–22 | 56.0% | #21 | 1,743 | 0 | 0 | 2015 | 22–20 | 52.4% | #51 | 1,705 | 0 | 2 |
| 29 | 2015 | 6–7 | 46.2% | #137 | 1,698 | 0 | 0 | 2016 | 5–9 | 35.7% | #147 | 1,648 | 0 | 2 |
| 30 | 2016 | 8–10 | 44.4% | #84 | 1,711 | 0 | 1 | 2017 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #966 | 1,628 | 0 | 2 |
| 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 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |