Teams

Multi Area - Fioretti/Bergeson

18 & Over Adult Local at State - Women · 5.0 (18&O) Women

7 players · average NTRP 5.00 / LOUISIANA

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2025-06-08vs New Orleans - RoddyWon 21
W#1 DoublesGiovanna Fioretti / Cassie Bergeson vs Nancy Marcello / Elizabeth Brinson6-1, 6-2
W#1 SinglesNadia Hitzman vs Tiffany Mann6-0, 6-0
L#2 DoublesIndi Mire Faught / Niamh Packer vs Meredith Montgomery / Kim Roddy4-6, 5-7
2025-06-08vs New Orleans - RoddyWon 30
W#1 DoublesVictoria Fisher / Therina Steenkamp vs Meredith Montgomery / Kim Roddy6-3, 6-2
W#1 SinglesNadia Hitzman vs Nancy Marcello6-0, 6-2
W#2 DoublesNiamh Packer / Indi Mire Faught vs Nicole Charbonnet / Sarah Evans6-1, 6-1
2025-06-07vs New Orleans - RoddyWon 21
W#1 DoublesCassie Bergeson / Therina Steenkamp vs Nicole Charbonnet / Sarah Evans6-1, 6-2
W#1 SinglesGiovanna Fioretti vs Elizabeth Brinson6-1, 6-1
L#2 DoublesVictoria Fisher / Nadia Hitzman vs Tiffany Mann / Nancy Marcello4-6, 6-2, 0-1
2025-06-07vs New Orleans - RoddyWon 30
W#1 DoublesGiovanna Fioretti / Therina Steenkamp vs Elizabeth Brinson / Tiffany Mann6-1, 6-0
W#1 SinglesCassie Bergeson vs Nancy Marcello7-6, 7-5
W#2 DoublesIndi Mire Faught / Niamh Packer vs Meredith Montgomery / Kim Roddy7-5, 4-6, 1-0
A tie can be incomplete. Tell us if someone is missing.
i
Grouped by tie — one fixture, several lines. A line shows only when a player on it is someone we have indexed, so an early-season tie for a newly-added team can look short. This also means the line count here will not match the header, which counts individual player appearances.

Flight standings for 5.0 (18&O) Women have not been collected yet. Where we have them we show every team in the flight ranked, with this team highlighted. The crawler is still filling in older seasons and flights.

ScoutingWhere each opponent usually plays

Signed-in extra: whether this captain plays strict strength order or mixes it up, from every doubles line they have put out. Create a free account to see it.

No lineup is published in advance, so the column below is where each player has actually been used — a captain's habits are the best available forecast. Sign in and claim your record to see who you have played.

Cassie Bergeson
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #1 Singles 33% · published 5
Giovanna Fioretti
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #1 Singles 33% · published
Indi Mire Faught
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Nadia Hitzman
usually #1 Singles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Niamh Packer
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Therina Steenkamp
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Victoria Fisher
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
Established pairs

Doubles pairs from this roster with three or more matches together anywhere — ordered by performance against what the rating gap predicted, not by record.

Niamh Packer + Indi Mire Faught213 matchesnot enough data
Roster

Ordered by our estimated dynamic rating, which is why two players at the same published level are not tied — a published 4.0 says nothing about where inside the band someone sits. Lines played in this team’s season are shown beside each name.

5
Cassie Bergeson
4W–1L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
Giovanna Fioretti
3W–0L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
Indi Mire Faught
2W–1L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
Nadia Hitzman
2W–1L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
Niamh Packer
16W–3L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
Therina Steenkamp
6W–0L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
Victoria Fisher
1W–1L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data

Three percentages are where each player stands right now: the chance they are below their band, inside it, or above it, on the way they are playing this season. The number on the right is our estimated dynamic rating, which USTA never publishes. This is today rather than a forecast of December, because a forecast has to assume future matches and cannot know whether someone will even be offered them. Percentages are blank where a player has too few matches this season, or at a level where the model does not yet beat a base-rate guess; the estimate is a weaker claim than a probability and survives where those do not.

Not affiliated with or endorsed by the USTA. Ratings labelled as published are USTA year-end figures; anything we describe as an estimate is ours, not USTA’s. Match data is from USTA TennisLink.