H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Tsvetana Pironkova vs Na Li H2H: 2-0
Tsvetana Pironkova holds a 2–0 lead over Na Li in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Tsvetana Pironkova leads 1–0 on carpet and 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Tsvetana Pironkova won the 2012 Paris third round 7-6(5) 3-2 RET.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
BUL
Age 38
Right-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H
2
–
0
2 main draw meetings
CHN
Age 44
Right-Handed
172 cm / 5'8"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 9, 2012* | Paris | WTA 500 | R32 | Carpet | Tsvetana Pironkova | 7-6(5) 3-2 (ret.) | Na Li | Match data |
| Aug 12, 2006* | Stockholm | WTA 250 | QF | Hard | Tsvetana Pironkova | 6-2 7-6(7) | Na Li | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tsvetana Pironkova | #1,170 | #31 | 1,805 | 1,770 | 169 | 222 | 43.2% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Na Li | #9 | #2 | 7,585 | 2,124 | 334 | 155 | 68.3% | 2 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 9 |
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 | Tsvetana Pironkova | Na Li | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 2005 | 6–3 | 66.7% | #86 | 1,599 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 2006 | 15–16 | 48.4% | #64 | 1,662 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #136 | 1,499 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2007 | 7–15 | 31.8% | #95 | 1,596 | 0 | 0 | 2001 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #302 | 1,483 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2008 | 15–17 | 46.9% | #44 | 1,631 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 21 | 2009 | 9–20 | 31.0% | #97 | 1,546 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 22 | 2010 | 16–15 | 51.6% | #35 | 1,623 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 6–1 | 85.7% | #78 | 1,601 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 2011 | 13–22 | 37.1% | #46 | 1,644 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 23–14 | 62.2% | #56 | 1,711 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 2012 | 19–23 | 45.2% | #42 | 1,658 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 36–22 | 62.1% | #21 | 1,801 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 2013 | 9–21 | 30.0% | #108 | 1,561 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 22–12 | 64.7% | #29 | 1,814 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2014 | 17–19 | 47.2% | #38 | 1,619 | 0 | 1 | 2008 | 24–12 | 66.7% | #23 | 1,843 | 0 | 2 |
| 27 | 2015 | 18–21 | 46.2% | #59 | 1,633 | 0 | 1 | 2009 | 35–17 | 67.3% | #15 | 1,914 | 0 | 2 |
| 28 | 2016 | 10–12 | 45.5% | #64 | 1,671 | 0 | 1 | 2010 | 36–20 | 64.3% | #11 | 1,844 | 0 | 3 |
| 29 | 2017 | 6–10 | 37.5% | #165 | 1,639 | 0 | 1 | 2011 | 33–17 | 66.0% | #5 | 1,868 | 1 | 5 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2012 | 43–16 | 72.9% | #7 | 2,016 | 1 | 6 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2013 | 46–14 | 76.7% | #3 | 2,077 | 1 | 7 |
| 32 | 2020 | 6–2 | 75.0% | #136 | 1,739 | 0 | 1 | 2014 | 29–7 | 80.6% | #9 | 2,031 | 2 | 9 |
| 33 | 2021 | 3–6 | 33.3% | #252 | 1,706 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |