Teams

ACAC Olson

2024 Richmond Combo Weekday · Richmond Combo Weekday 5.5 Women

14 players · average NTRP 3.12 / VIRGINIA

View scouting list →
Schedule1 played
2024-11-21vs SCC weekday WeisigerWon 21
W#1 DoublesBrooke Olson / Rebecca Rhodes vs Brooke Gilbert / BRANDY NICKEL7-5, 1-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesMary Follis / Marydith Newman vs Erin Garrett / Aimee Collins2-6, 0-6
W#3 DoublesTeresa Ilnicki / Kelley Kent vs Colleen Quattlebaum / Christina Sursa6-3, 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 Weekday 5.5 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 2.87 estimated across 12 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.

3.41
Amanda Rice
published 3.5
3.29
Victoria Bradt
usually #3 Doubles 80%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published 3.5
3.21
Kristen Hornbeck
published
3.17
Rebecca Rhodes
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.07
Kelley Kent
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.97
Margaret Thompson
published
2.90
Brooke Olson
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.73
Mary Follis
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.63
Marydith Newman
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.55
Teresa Ilnicki
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.36
Jenessa Lopez
published
2.18
Caroline Wheeler
published 2.5
Megan Smith
published
Myrna Abed
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.

Kelley Kent + Brooke Olson7256% games+1.8% vs expected
Kelley Kent + Kristen Hornbeck404 matchesnot enough data
Jenessa Lopez + Caroline Wheeler033 matchesnot enough data
Jenessa Lopez + Marydith Newman213 matchesnot enough data
Rebecca Rhodes + Brooke Olson303 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
Amanda Rice
38W–11L career · no lines in 2024
<1%74%25%
3.41
3.5
Victoria Bradt
150W–167L career · 5 lines in 2024
2%92%6%
3.29
Kristen Hornbeck
20W–3L career · no lines in 2024
7%91%2%
3.21
Rebecca Rhodes
16W–5L career · 1 line in 2024
<1%11%89%
3.17
Kelley Kent
56W–27L career · 1 line in 2024
<1%32%68%
3.07
Margaret Thompson
29W–25L career · no lines in 2024
<1%60%40%
2.97
3
Brooke Olson
31W–17L career · 1 line in 2024
<1%75%24%
2.90
Mary Follis
26W–25L career · 1 line in 2024
5%92%3%
2.73
Marydith Newman
15W–18L career · 1 line in 2024
17%82%<1%
2.63
Teresa Ilnicki
18W–21L career · 1 line in 2024
36%64%<1%
2.55
Jenessa Lopez
28W–24L career · no lines in 2024
0%85%15%
2.36
2.5
Caroline Wheeler
13W–22L career · no lines in 2024
0%99%1%
2.18
Megan Smith
1W–1L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Myrna Abed
4W–5L career · no 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.