Teams

Westwood Caudill/Dean

2025 Richmond Combo Weekend · Richmond Combo Weekend 6.5 Women

16 players · average NTRP 3.30 / VIRGINIA

View scouting list →
Schedule1 played
2025-08-24vs Ridgetop ScammellLost 03
L#1 DoublesAubrey Moore / JJ Thompson vs Mary Beth Scott / Andrea Bleck-Smith1-6, 6-4, 0-1
L#2 DoublesCody Nystrom / Caley Wilson vs Alice McCollum / Alden McDaniel3-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesSarah Paladino-strater / Lauren Connor vs Windy Campbell / Shelley Deitz3-6, 4-6
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 Richmond Combo Weekend 6.5 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 3.09 estimated across 14 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.

3.44
Kate Waller
published
3.42
Erin Sheridan
published 3.5
3.39
Aubrey Moore
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
Cody Nystrom
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.23
Sarah Paladino-strater
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.19
JJ Thompson
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.18
Aubrey Fraser
published 3.5
3.16
Anne Trexler
published 3.5
3.14
Lauren Connor
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
3.06
Karen Viverette
published
2.97
Sara Sloman
published
2.95
Allison Rosen
published 3
2.83
Caley Wilson
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
Donna Dean
published 3
2.70
Jana Chesley
published
2.63
Caroline Caudill
published 3
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.

Allison Rosen + Caley Wilson134 matchesnot enough data
Caroline Caudill + Jana Chesley213 matchesnot enough data
JJ Thompson + Erin Sheridan303 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.

Kate Waller
12W–10L career · no lines in 2025
<1%67%33%
3.44
3.5
Erin Sheridan
32W–7L career · no lines in 2025
<1%73%27%
3.42
3.5
Aubrey Moore
11W–5L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%81%19%
3.39
3.5
Cody Nystrom
0W–1L career · 1 line in 2025
not enough data
Sarah Paladino-strater
19W–13L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%4%96%
3.23
3.5
JJ Thompson
10W–4L career · 1 line in 2025
8%92%1%
3.19
3.5
Aubrey Fraser
3W–5L career · no lines in 2025
8%91%1%
3.18
3.5
Anne Trexler
6W–5L career · no lines in 2025
11%89%<1%
3.16
Lauren Connor
38W–10L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%14%86%
3.14
Karen Viverette
11W–12L career · no lines in 2025
32%68%<1%
3.06
Sara Sloman
16W–9L career · no lines in 2025
<1%60%40%
2.97
3
Allison Rosen
16W–9L career · no lines in 2025
<1%65%35%
2.95
3
Caley Wilson
10W–10L career · 1 line in 2025
1%90%10%
2.83
3
Donna Dean
7W–7L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Jana Chesley
21W–19L career · no lines in 2025
6%93%1%
2.70
3
Caroline Caudill
7W–9L career · type A · no lines in 2025
16%84%<1%
2.63

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.