Teams

EAST-MONTE Winter Team Singles 4.5+ WOMEN SEM F

2024 zSEM WINTER TEAM SINGLES · 2024 WOMEN 4.5+ WINTER SINGLES SEM

6 players · average NTRP 4.75 / S.E. MICHIGAN

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 →
Schedule6 played
W#1 SinglesJessica Kruczek vs Carly Eckert1-0
W#2 SinglesMcCall Monte vs N Maxine Kennebrew6-4, 6-1
L#1 SinglesNynke van der Goot vs Ayumi Sasaki6-7
W#2 SinglesTara Stover vs Alissa VanderKooi6-1, 6-2
L#1 SinglesDarylann Gulliver vs Ayumi Sasaki1-6, 0-6
L#2 SinglesNynke van der Goot vs Kelly Smith6-3, 2-6
W#3 SinglesTara Stover vs Carly Eckert6-2, 4-3
W#1 SinglesDarylann Gulliver vs Kelly Smith6-4, 2-1
W#2 SinglesTara Stover vs N Maxine Kennebrew6-1, 6-1
W#3 SinglesJessica Kruczek vs Leimomi Respicio6-1, 6-1
W#1 SinglesNynke van der Goot vs Alissa VanderKooi6-3, 6-4
W#2 SinglesJessica Kruczek vs Katelyn Blumberg6-4, 6-3
W#1 SinglesKatelyn Andrews vs Alissa VanderKooi6-3, 6-1
W#2 SinglesJessica Kruczek vs N Maxine Kennebrew6-0, 6-0
W#3 SinglesMcCall Monte vs Leimomi Respicio6-2, 6-3
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 standings2 teams · 2024 WOMEN 4.5+ WINTER SINGLES SEM
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1EAST-MONTE Winter Team Singles 4.5+ WOMEN SEM F4212610109
2FAC-BLUMBERG Winter Team Singles 4.5+ WOMEN SEM F2461225153

Ordered by team wins, then losses, then sets lost — the order USTA uses to seed a flight. Individual wins are lines, not ties.

See the full flight, with every team’s record

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 4.09 estimated across 3 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.

Darylann Gulliver
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 5
4.32
McCall Monte
usually #3 Singles 50%, also #2 Singles 50% · published 4.5
4.08
Jessica Kruczek
usually #2 Singles 50%, also #1 Singles 25% · published
3.88
Katelyn Andrews
usually #1 Singles 100% · published
Nynke van der Goot
usually #1 Singles 67%, also #2 Singles 33% · published
Tara Stover
usually #2 Singles 67%, also #3 Singles 33% · 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.

Katelyn Andrews + Darylann Gulliver5081% games+12.5% vs expected
Jessica Kruczek + Katelyn Andrews3252% games+10.1% vs expected
McCall Monte + Jessica Kruczek4552% games+5.3% vs expected
Jessica Kruczek + Darylann Gulliver5066% gamesnot enough data
McCall Monte + Darylann Gulliver224 matchesnot enough data
Tara Stover + Darylann Gulliver303 matchesnot enough data
McCall Monte + Katelyn Andrews213 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
Darylann Gulliver
47W–17L career · 2 lines in 2024
not enough data
4.5
McCall Monte
176W–80L career · 2 lines in 2024
1%89%10%
4.32
Jessica Kruczek
85W–44L career · 4 lines in 2024
29%71%<1%
4.08
Katelyn Andrews
58W–15L career · 1 line in 2024
<1%<1%>99%
3.88
Nynke van der Goot
18W–17L career · 3 lines in 2024
not enough data
Tara Stover
12W–3L career · 3 lines in 2024
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.