Teams

WP-G NAVY

2026 CTA ADULT 18-39 - DEN · WOMEN 3.5 - ADULT 18-39 - DEN

10 players · average NTRP 3.50 / COLORADO

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
2026-07-10vs WP-O TEALWon 20
W#1 Female DoublesMolly Burke / Allison Abrams vs Jordan Arnell / Lisa Miller6-2, 6-2
W#2 Female SinglesErika Wangeman vs Laura Steeby6-2, 6-3
2026-07-02vs SS-LGT TEALLost 01
L#1 Female DoublesMegan Gunden / Marina Sterngold vs Katelyn Peek / Marissa Murray6-4, 2-6, 0-1
2026-06-25vs LEBTC BLUEWon 10
W#1 Female SinglesMegan Gunden vs Jordyn Probst6-1, 6-0
2026-06-18vs WP-O TEALWon 10
W#2 Female SinglesErika Wangeman vs Laura Steeby7-5, 6-4
2026-06-11vs SS-LGT TEALLost 02
L#1 Female DoublesAubrey Siegel / Erika Wangeman vs Nohemi Almaraz / Katelyn Peek2-6, 2-6
L#1 Female SinglesAllison Abrams vs Emily Penrod0-6, 0-6
2026-06-04vs LEBTC BLUESplit 11
W#1 Female SinglesMegan Gunden vs Emmalee Dekkers6-2, 6-1
L#2 Female SinglesMarina Sterngold vs Kristin Hull4-6, 5-7
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 standings4 teams · WOMEN 3.5 - ADULT 18-39 - DEN
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1LTC-D GOLD3310820164
2GAC BLUE3371123166
3CR-MG YELLOW2471125181
4WP-G NAVY1541430197

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 3.37 estimated across 10 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.

3.56
Allison Abrams
usually #1 Female Singles 50%, also #1 Female Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.52
Rachel Williams
published
3.44
Marina Sterngold
usually #2 Female Singles 50%, also #1 Female Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.44
Molly Burke
published
3.43
Megan Gunden
usually #1 Female Singles 67%, also #1 Female Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.37
Lauren Petronella
published
3.32
Jordan Cadman
published
3.29
Erika Wangeman
usually #2 Female Singles 67%, also #1 Female Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.23
Shereen Sairafi
published
3.06
Aubrey Siegel
published 3.5
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 Abrams + Molly Burke39166% games+10.7% vs expected
Marina Sterngold + Megan Gunden7454% games+5.5% vs expected
Rachel Williams + Megan Gunden5066% games+2.4% vs expected
Jordan Cadman + Lauren Petronella303 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.

3.5
Allison Abrams
63W–12L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%32%68%
3.56
Rachel Williams
89W–23L career · no lines in 2026
<1%44%56%
3.52
3.5
Marina Sterngold
68W–37L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%67%33%
3.44
Molly Burke
59W–8L career · no lines in 2026
<1%69%31%
3.44
3.5
Megan Gunden
106W–51L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%70%30%
3.43
Lauren Petronella
4W–0L career · no lines in 2026
<1%85%15%
3.37
Jordan Cadman
3W–0L career · no lines in 2026
1%91%8%
3.32
3.5
Erika Wangeman
17W–10L career · 3 lines in 2026
1%93%5%
3.29
Shereen Sairafi
25W–11L career · no lines in 2026
4%94%2%
3.23
3.5
Aubrey Siegel
10W–12L career · no lines in 2026
33%67%<1%
3.06

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.