Teams

Hodge, Kathy

2023 Adult 18 & Over Summer 2.5W - 5.0 · 3.0 Women

16 players · average NTRP 3.33 / HEART OF AMERICA

No matches recorded for this roster in this league — it may be a placeholder registration, or the season may not have started.

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2023-06-22vs Muller, SonyaWon 41
W#1 DoublesMichelle Jaimez / Emily Fuller vs Megan Viviano / Aiman Dvorak7-5, 2-5, 1-0
L#1 SinglesMary Hoffman vs Heidi McIntyre7-6, 2-4, 1-0
W#2 DoublesMegan Bergquist / Maureen Brady vs Janet Crawford / Christie Montague6-1, 6-1
W#2 SinglesSirisha Thippabhotla vs Alli Hiatt6-2, 6-2
W#3 DoublesJennifer Stawski / Sarah Reedy vs Shelly Olufson / Christine Carle6-0, 6-3
2023-06-01vs Weston, DawnLost 23
L#1 DoublesMegan Bergquist / Michelle Jaimez vs Dawn Weston / Audra Dericotte1-6, 4-6
L#1 SinglesJennifer Stawski vs Shannon Lyon5-7, 1-6
W#2 DoublesMary Hoffman / HUIQUN MA vs Sarah Hanna / Courtney Marsh6-0, 6-2
W#2 SinglesEmily Fuller vs Valerie Jennings6-3, 6-3
L#3 DoublesNisha Joseph / Sarah Reedy vs Kara Cowie / Laura Lange4-6, 2-6
2023-05-18vs HOA/Andrew/18&Over3.0WLost 05
L#1 DoublesMary Hoffman / Michelle Jaimez vs Maria Andrew / Samantha Egbert6-4, 4-6, 0-1
L#1 SinglesHUIQUN MA vs Shaina Billington2-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesKathy Hodge / Melissa Urich vs Ashton Sparks / Jennifer Haake2-6, 4-6
L#2 SinglesSarah Reedy vs Marcella Prock1-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesElizabeth MacGonagle / Kathy Perkins vs Camille Potchad / Tracy Farnsworth2-6, 6-3, 0-1
2023-05-04vs Finn, KellyWon 32
W#1 DoublesMegan Bergquist / Mary Hoffman vs Erin O'Dell / Carolyn Shultz6-0, 6-4
L#1 SinglesHUIQUN MA vs Lauren Shreve4-6, 2-6
W#2 DoublesKathy Hodge / Maureen Brady vs Kelly Finn / Lacey Spallitta6-2, 6-2
L#2 SinglesSirisha Thippabhotla vs Emma Rieper6-0, 3-6, 0-1
W#3 DoublesElizabeth MacGonagle / Kathy Perkins vs Janae Likens / ABIGAIL FLEMING6-4, 6-4
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 3.0 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.

Roster averages 2.95 estimated across 12 rated players. 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.

3.40
Lori Shiflett
usually #2 Doubles 57%, also #3 Doubles 29% · published
3.28
Megan Bergquist
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Emily Fuller
usually #2 Singles 38%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.25
Maureen Brady
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.15
Melissa Urich
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.13
Mary Hoffman
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
2.95
Michelle Jaimez
usually #3 Doubles 60%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published
2.89
HUIQUN MA
usually #3 Doubles 43%, also #1 Singles 29% · published 3.5
2.78
Kathy Hodge
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.77
Elizabeth MacGonagle
usually #3 Doubles 88%, also #2 Doubles 13% · published 3
2.71
Paulette Schwerdt
published
2.69
Kathy Perkins
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 38% · published
2.45
Sarah Reedy
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Singles 33% · published
Jennifer Stawski
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
Nisha Joseph
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Sirisha Thippabhotla
usually #2 Singles 100% · 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.

Maureen Brady + Melissa Urich4261% games+14.7% vs expected
Megan Bergquist + Mary Hoffman9265% games+11.7% vs expected
HUIQUN MA + Maureen Brady8362% games+11.1% vs expected
Megan Bergquist + HUIQUN MA4254% games+4.9% vs expected
Elizabeth MacGonagle + Kathy Perkins4649% games+1.6% vs expected
Elizabeth MacGonagle + Paulette Schwerdt4446% games−0.2% vs expected
Michelle Jaimez + Lori Shiflett2641% games−0.3% vs expected
Mary Hoffman + Kathy Hodge7357% games−1.1% vs expected
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.

Lori Shiflett
54W–36L career · 7 lines in 2023
<1%78%22%
3.40
Megan Bergquist
112W–119L career · 3 lines in 2023
1%94%5%
3.28
3.5
Emily Fuller
29W–18L career · 8 lines in 2023
not enough data
Maureen Brady
24W–25L career · 2 lines in 2023
3%95%3%
3.25
Melissa Urich
44W–44L career · 1 line in 2023
12%88%<1%
3.15
Mary Hoffman
41W–31L career · 4 lines in 2023
16%84%<1%
3.13
Michelle Jaimez
51W–59L career · 10 lines in 2023
64%36%<1%
2.95
3.5
HUIQUN MA
48W–56L career · 7 lines in 2023
79%21%<1%
2.89
Kathy Hodge
41W–87L career · 2 lines in 2023
2%94%5%
2.78
3
Elizabeth MacGonagle
30W–57L career · 8 lines in 2023
2%94%4%
2.77
Paulette Schwerdt
24W–34L career · no lines in 2023
5%93%1%
2.71
Kathy Perkins
32W–71L career · 8 lines in 2023
8%92%1%
2.69
Sarah Reedy
7W–59L career · 3 lines in 2023
65%35%<1%
2.45
Jennifer Stawski
19W–15L career · 2 lines in 2023
not enough data
Nisha Joseph
2W–9L career · 1 line in 2023
not enough data
Sirisha Thippabhotla
6W–11L career · 2 lines in 2023
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.