H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 08:25 UTC
Su-Wei Hsieh vs Shuai Peng H2H: 0-2
Shuai Peng holds a 2–0 lead over Su-Wei Hsieh in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Shuai Peng leads 2–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Shuai Peng won the 2013 Hobart third round 6-2 6-7(4) 7-6(4).
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
TPE
Age 40
Right-Handed
169 cm / 5'7"
H2H
0
–
2
2 main draw meetings
CHN
Age 40
Right-Handed
177 cm / 5'10"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 10, 2013* | Hobart | WTA 250 | R32 | Hard | Shuai Peng | 6-2 6-7(4) 7-6(4) | Su-Wei Hsieh | Match data |
| Feb 8, 2007* | Pattaya | WTA 250 | R32 | Hard | Shuai Peng | 6-1 6-2 | Su-Wei Hsieh | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Su-Wei Hsieh | #909 | #23 | 1,960 | 1,874 | 150 | 173 | 46.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
| Shuai Peng | #820 | #14 | 2,825 | 1,890 | 300 | 258 | 53.8% | 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 | Su-Wei Hsieh | Shuai Peng | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 15 | 2001 | 5–2 | 71.4% | #164 | 1,549 | 0 | 0 | 2001 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #518 | 1,493 | 0 | 0 |
| 16 | 2002 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #267 | 1,541 | 0 | 0 | 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 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #142 | 1,506 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 20–16 | 55.6% | #36 | 1,678 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2006 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #129 | 1,462 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 18–17 | 51.4% | #55 | 1,727 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2007 | 1–7 | 12.5% | #157 | 1,419 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 19–17 | 52.8% | #45 | 1,737 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2008 | 5–8 | 38.5% | #81 | 1,483 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 24–22 | 52.2% | #40 | 1,706 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2009 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #314 | 1,474 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 23–22 | 51.1% | #46 | 1,770 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2010 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #362 | 1,455 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 15–13 | 53.6% | #72 | 1,742 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2011 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #172 | 1,460 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 48–23 | 67.6% | #17 | 1,817 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2012 | 22–13 | 62.9% | #25 | 1,689 | 0 | 2 | 2012 | 21–22 | 48.8% | #40 | 1,699 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2013 | 13–25 | 34.2% | #86 | 1,558 | 0 | 2 | 2013 | 18–18 | 50.0% | #42 | 1,657 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2014 | 6–12 | 33.3% | #141 | 1,545 | 0 | 2 | 2014 | 28–22 | 56.0% | #21 | 1,743 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2015 | 6–5 | 54.5% | #93 | 1,583 | 0 | 2 | 2015 | 6–7 | 46.2% | #137 | 1,698 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2016 | 12–12 | 50.0% | #87 | 1,588 | 0 | 2 | 2016 | 8–10 | 44.4% | #84 | 1,711 | 0 | 1 |
| 31 | 2017 | 8–15 | 34.8% | #82 | 1,600 | 0 | 2 | 2017 | 37–21 | 63.8% | #27 | 1,815 | 0 | 2 |
| 32 | 2018 | 30–16 | 65.2% | #28 | 1,768 | 0 | 3 | 2018 | 1–8 | 11.1% | #125 | 1,741 | 0 | 2 |
| 33 | 2019 | 30–23 | 56.6% | #32 | 1,777 | 0 | 3 | 2019 | 7–9 | 43.8% | #109 | 1,679 | 0 | 2 |
| 34 | 2020 | 1–7 | 12.5% | #67 | 1,703 | 0 | 3 | 2020 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #117 | 1,636 | 0 | 2 |
| 35 | 2021 | 9–14 | 39.1% | #108 | 1,686 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 37 | 2023 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #713 | 1,658 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |