H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 10:32 UTC
Shuai Zhang vs Jil Teichmann H2H: 2-0
Shuai Zhang holds a 2–0 lead over Jil Teichmann in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Shuai Zhang leads 2–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Shuai Zhang won the 2022 US Open first round 6-4 6-2.
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
177 cm / 5'10"
H2H
2
–
0
2 main draw meetings
SUI
Age 29
Left-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 31, 2022* | US Open | Grand Slam | R128 | Hard | Shuai Zhang | 6-4 6-2 | Jil Teichmann | Match data |
| Feb 28, 2018 | Acapulco | WTA 250 | R16 | Hard | Shuai Zhang | 7-6(5) 6-4 | Jil Teichmann | 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 Zhang | #54 | #22 | 1,905 | 1,856 | 225 | 288 | 43.9% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
| Jil Teichmann | #119 | #21 | 2,101 | 1,876 | 98 | 107 | 47.8% | 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.
| Shuai Zhang | Jil Teichmann | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles |
| 2006 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #203 | 1,495 | 0 | 0 | 2016 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #209 | 1,524 | 0 | 0 |
| 2007 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #149 | 1,464 | 0 | 0 | 2017 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #139 | 1,523 | 0 | 0 |
| 2008 | 0–6 | 0.0% | #235 | 1,412 | 0 | 0 | 2018 | 3–6 | 33.3% | #148 | 1,531 | 0 | 0 |
| 2009 | 2–1 | 66.7% | #154 | 1,467 | 0 | 0 | 2019 | 14–11 | 56.0% | #69 | 1,632 | 0 | 2 |
| 2010 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #90 | 1,492 | 0 | 0 | 2020 | 9–12 | 42.9% | #57 | 1,671 | 0 | 2 |
| 2011 | 8–22 | 26.7% | #126 | 1,443 | 0 | 0 | 2021 | 23–20 | 53.5% | #37 | 1,766 | 0 | 2 |
| 2012 | 2–6 | 25.0% | #127 | 1,456 | 0 | 0 | 2022 | 19–21 | 47.5% | #35 | 1,690 | 0 | 2 |
| 2013 | 9–4 | 69.2% | #52 | 1,599 | 0 | 1 | 2023 | 11–20 | 35.5% | #147 | 1,613 | 0 | 2 |
| 2014 | 18–24 | 42.9% | #61 | 1,602 | 0 | 1 | 2024 | 3–2 | 60.0% | #135 | 1,633 | 0 | 2 |
| 2015 | 4–12 | 25.0% | #139 | 1,519 | 0 | 1 | 2025 | 8–9 | 47.1% | #123 | 1,651 | 0 | 2 |
| 2016 | 22–19 | 53.7% | #23 | 1,722 | 0 | 1 | 2026 | 6–2 | 75.0% | #119 | 1,709 | 0 | 2 |
| 2017 | 23–24 | 48.9% | #36 | 1,762 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2018 | 28–27 | 50.9% | #40 | 1,726 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2019 | 18–23 | 43.9% | #40 | 1,680 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2020 | 12–10 | 54.5% | #35 | 1,731 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2021 | 15–24 | 38.5% | #60 | 1,632 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2022 | 34–26 | 56.7% | #25 | 1,732 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2023 | 4–18 | 18.2% | #245 | 1,525 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2024 | 5–12 | 29.4% | #205 | 1,576 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2025 | 10–7 | 58.8% | #81 | 1,731 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2026 | 8–15 | 34.8% | #54 | 1,714 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |