Teams

B8 WOCC Kramer/Vetter

2023 Richmond Combo Mixed · Richmond Combo Mixed 6.5

17 players · average NTRP 3.25 / VIRGINIA

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2023-11-19vs B3 Burkwood Sweeney/JerniganWon 10
W#1 DoublesYancey Haas / Michael Chapman vs Steven Walworth / Kimberly Garrett4-6, 6-2, 1-0
2023-10-29vs B1 ACAC RalstonLost 01
L#3 DoublesYancey Haas / Craig Sampson vs Jean Davis / Joey Townsend7-6, 5-7, 1-0
2023-10-22vs B6 Avalon George 6.5Lost 01
L#3 DoublesYancey Haas / Charles Christianson vs Chris Giacchi / Joni Albrecht2-6, 6-3, 0-1
2023-10-07vs B2 KRA CzlackersWon 10
W#2 DoublesYancey Haas / Michael Chapman vs Zach Daniel / Melanie Spears6-2, 2-6, 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 Richmond Combo Mixed 6.5 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 3.13 estimated across 17 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.

3.75
Yancey Haas
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.37
Laura Vetter
published
3.35
Terence Blackwood
published
3.33
Roland Vetter
published
3.33
Michael Chapman
published
3.31
Jenny Norfleet
published
3.27
Stephen Mathews
published
3.15
Kelly Gregory
published
3.13
Jenefer Williams
published
3.12
George Sibley
published
3.08
Zinie Sampson
published
2.98
Joy Chenault
published
2.94
Troy Kingsbury
published
2.89
2.89
George Forsythe
published
2.74
2.69
Craig Sampson
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.

Laura Vetter + Roland Vetter404 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
Yancey Haas
166W–100L career · 6 lines in 2023
4%93%3%
3.75
Laura Vetter
20W–10L career · no lines in 2023
<1%82%17%
3.37
Terence Blackwood
22W–22L career · no lines in 2023
1%85%14%
3.35
Roland Vetter
16W–5L career · no lines in 2023
1%88%11%
3.33
Michael Chapman
12W–3L career · no lines in 2023
1%88%11%
3.33
Jenny Norfleet
13W–8L career · no lines in 2023
1%90%8%
3.31
Stephen Mathews
25W–13L career · no lines in 2023
3%92%5%
3.27
Kelly Gregory
13W–15L career · no lines in 2023
15%85%1%
3.15
Jenefer Williams
7W–11L career · no lines in 2023
18%82%<1%
3.13
George Sibley
17W–7L career · no lines in 2023
<1%21%79%
3.12
Zinie Sampson
15W–17L career · no lines in 2023
<1%27%73%
3.08
Joy Chenault
2W–2L career · no lines in 2023
<1%56%43%
2.98
Troy Kingsbury
12W–10L career · no lines in 2023
<1%67%33%
2.94
3
Charles Christianson
18W–18L career · no lines in 2023
<1%78%22%
2.89
George Forsythe
14W–8L career · no lines in 2023
<1%79%21%
2.89
3
Catherine Matawaran
16W–14L career · no lines in 2023
4%93%3%
2.74
3
Craig Sampson
8W–11L career · no lines in 2023
9%90%1%
2.69

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.