Teams

Me.Golder18S

2025 Capital Singles 18 & Over · 4.0 Women

8 players · average NTRP 4.00 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2025-07-31vs Li.Murdock18SWon 20
W#1 SinglesMeryl Golder vs Lindsay Murdock7-5, 6-4
W#2 SinglesErin Conigliaro vs Rachael Kiker6-4, 6-4
2025-07-24vs Er.McAllister18SWon 20
W#1 SinglesMeryl Golder vs Amber Richardson6-1, 6-0
W#2 SinglesLeigh Barter vs Laura Rendon6-0, 6-2
2025-07-17vs Li.Murdock18SSplit 11
W#1 SinglesMeryl Golder vs Lindsay Murdock7-6, 6-2
L#2 SinglesElena Pinkus vs Sapna Varkey4-6, 6-7
2025-07-10Lost 01
L#1 SinglesElena Pinkus vs Megan Bennett2-6, 4-6
2025-07-10vs El.Hamilton18SWon 20
W#1 SinglesMeryl Golder vs Smita Paranjape6-3, 6-3
W#2 SinglesElena Pinkus vs Erika Grenier6-1, 6-1
2025-07-03vs To.Sutler18SLost 01
L#1 SinglesLeigh Barter vs Christine Hughes2-6, 3-6
2025-06-05vs El.Hamilton18SSplit 11
L#1 SinglesMaya Hahn vs Smita Paranjape2-6, 6-7
W#2 SinglesErin Conigliaro vs Elise Hamilton7-5, 3-6, 1-0
2025-05-29vs To.Sutler18SWon 20
W#1 SinglesMeryl Golder vs Amanda Campbell6-0, 6-1
W#2 SinglesLeigh Barter vs Janet Sprague6-1, 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 standings for 4.0 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 3.83 estimated across 7 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.

4.13
Meryl Golder
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 4
3.86
Leigh Barter
usually #2 Singles 67%, also #1 Singles 33% · published 4
3.83
Elena Pinkus
usually #2 Singles 67%, also #1 Singles 33% · published 4
3.82
Maya Hahn
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 4
3.72
Ashley Palmer
published 4
3.71
Erin Conigliaro
usually #2 Singles 100% · published 4
3.71
Hannah Boghosian
published
Jordan Fieldstein
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.

Elena Pinkus + Meryl Golder8459% games+14.1% vs expected
Meryl Golder + Leigh Barter21463% games+5.7% vs expected
Meryl Golder + Erin Conigliaro224 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
Meryl Golder
141W–75L career · 5 lines in 2025
<1%17%83%
4.13
4
Leigh Barter
186W–64L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%83%17%
3.86
4
Elena Pinkus
124W–68L career · 3 lines in 2025
1%88%11%
3.83
4
Maya Hahn
61W–33L career · 1 line in 2025
1%89%10%
3.82
4
Ashley Palmer
6W–6L career · no lines in 2025
6%92%2%
3.72
4
Erin Conigliaro
175W–128L career · 2 lines in 2025
7%91%2%
3.71
Hannah Boghosian
20W–13L career · no lines in 2025
7%91%2%
3.71
Jordan Fieldstein
0W–1L career · no lines in 2025
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.