Teams

Team Scott

2022 Coppermine Tri-Level 18 & Over · Coppermine Tri-Level 3.5,3.0,2.5 Women

9 players · average NTRP 3.42 / MARYLAND

View scouting list →
Schedule9 played
2022-12-11vs Team TetraultSplit 11
W#2 DoublesJennifer Exelby / Beth van Derslice vs Katie Tetrault / Eloise Grose6-2, 5-7, 1-0
L#3 DoublesMichelle Tyde / Caroline Wolven vs Shrijoyee Ray / Marlo Newton5-7, 1-6
2022-11-20vs Team CrawleyWon 10
W#3 DoublesAimee MacEda / Michelle Tyde vs Sophia Crawley / Betsy Morris6-2, 6-0
2022-11-07Won 10
W#3 DoublesCaroline Wolven / Aimee MacEda vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2022-10-24vs Team NelsonWon 10
W#3 DoublesAimee MacEda / Michelle Tyde vs Dianna Sinofsky / Margaret Grow-Sadler6-2, 7-5
2022-10-08vs Team TetraultSplit 11
L#2 DoublesElizabeth Scott / Beth van Derslice vs Shrijoyee Ray / Eloise Grose6-4, 3-6, 0-1
W#3 DoublesMichelle Tyde / Aimee MacEda vs Carole Veihmeyer / Melanie Yaksich3-6, 6-1, 1-0
2022-09-24vs Team CrawleyWon 20
W#2 DoublesElizabeth Scott / Beth van Derslice vs Tannan Hagyard / Maria Shearer6-2, 6-2
W#3 DoublesMichelle Tyde / Caroline Wolven vs Denise Litzau / Linda Harrell7-5, 6-2
2022-08-30vs Team CrawleyLost 01
L#3 DoublesLeigh Tobin / Michelle Tyde vs Andrea Smolen / Denise Litzau2-6, 0-6
2022-08-11vs Adin4meWon 10
W#2 DoublesElizabeth Scott / Beth van Derslice vs Ann Marsh / Jennifer Rauhofer6-2, 6-4
2022-08-09vs Team TetraultWon 10
W#3 DoublesCaroline Wolven / Michelle Tyde vs Meghana Gupte / Marlo Newton6-4, 1-6, 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 Coppermine Tri-Level 3.5,3.0,2.5 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 3.21 estimated across 9 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.

3.93
Ruzica Ragontse
published 4
3.72
Jennifer Exelby
published 4
3.69
Jean Acuna
published
3.44
Katie Young
published
3.38
Beth van Derslice
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
2.78
Caroline Wolven
published 3
2.72
Aimee MacEda
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.69
Leigh Tobin
published
2.59
Michelle Tyde
usually #3 Doubles 100% · 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.

Michelle Tyde + Aimee MacEda5356% gamesnot enough data
Jennifer Exelby + Ruzica Ragontse213 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.

4
Ruzica Ragontse
84W–74L career · no lines in 2022
<1%70%30%
3.93
4
Jennifer Exelby
95W–39L career · no lines in 2022
4%94%2%
3.72
Jean Acuna
8W–4L career · no lines in 2022
8%92%1%
3.69
Katie Young
18W–5L career · no lines in 2022
<1%69%31%
3.44
3.5
Beth van Derslice
57W–33L career · 4 lines in 2022
<1%83%17%
3.38
3
Caroline Wolven
4W–4L career · no lines in 2022
2%94%4%
2.78
3
Aimee MacEda
27W–22L career · 4 lines in 2022
5%94%2%
2.72
Leigh Tobin
11W–14L career · no lines in 2022
7%92%1%
2.69
3
Michelle Tyde
39W–42L career · 7 lines in 2022
25%75%<1%
2.59

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.