Teams

*1-CGonzales-Eno

2024 Eno River Adult 18 & Over · 18 & Over Adult 3.0 Women Evening

8 players · average NTRP 3.00 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2024-04-30vs *5-TDavies-CHCC 3.0Split 11
W#2 DoublesWilton Burns / Cecilia Gonzales vs Jennifer Braby / Lauren Derrenbacher6-0, 6-0
L#3 DoublesAreli Grodski / Kelli Moore vs Tracy Davies / Adrian Davies3-6, 0-6
2024-04-14vs *4-LDubois-Eno-18 3.0Split 11
L#1 SinglesRagini Singh vs Jesse Banks6-2, 5-7, 0-1
W#2 DoublesCecilia Gonzales / Wilton Burns vs Danielle Nader / Michele Mulcahy6-4, 3-6, 1-0
2024-04-09vs *2-LCaldwell-SVCLost 01
L#2 SinglesRagini Singh vs Ann Flodin4-6, 6-7
2024-04-02vs *3-ENeilson-EnoSplit 11
W#1 SinglesRagini Singh vs Kristy Dumlao6-3, 6-1
L#3 DoublesKelli Moore / Areli Grodski vs Sharon Fadelici / Jolie LeBrun3-6, 1-6
2024-03-19vs *5-TDavies-CHCC 3.0Lost 02
L#2 DoublesCecilia Gonzales / Virginia Wiggins vs Julie Myers / Joanna Hooten6-2, 2-6, 0-1
L#2 SinglesRagini Singh vs Joli Stockwell6-1, 4-6, 0-1
2024-03-17vs *3-ENeilson-EnoSplit 11
L#1 DoublesCecilia Gonzales / Virginia Wiggins vs Sharon Fadelici / Polly Creveling0-6, 2-6
W#2 SinglesRagini Singh vs Sandy Rogowski6-0, 6-0
2024-03-05vs *2-LCaldwell-SVCLost 02
L#1 SinglesRagini Singh vs Naomi Worden7-5, 4-6, 0-1
L#2 DoublesCecilia Gonzales / Cristina Salvador vs Debbie Castiller / Kyle Wolf1-6, 1-6
2024-02-20vs *4-LDubois-Eno-18 3.0Lost 03
L#1 SinglesRagini Singh vs Dr Amy Linder1-6, 4-6
L#2 DoublesVirginia Wiggins / Cecilia Gonzales vs Christina Pipkin / Annaliese Gresham6-7, 4-6
L#3 DoublesCristina Salvador / Areli Grodski vs Laura Dubois / Madeline BRADY3-6, 3-6
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 18 & Over Adult 3.0 Women Evening 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 2.82 estimated across 8 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.

3.35
Ragini Singh
usually #1 Singles 57%, also #2 Singles 43% · published 3.5
3.04
Wilton Burns
published
2.94
Susan Graff
published
2.80
Elizabeth Garg
published
2.70
Cecilia Gonzales
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Singles 40% · published 3
2.60
Krissy Dunn
published
2.55
Areli Grodski
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 2.5
2.55
Kelli Moore
published
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
Ragini Singh
94W–47L career · 7 lines in 2024
1%86%14%
3.35
Wilton Burns
12W–11L career · no lines in 2024
<1%38%62%
3.04
Susan Graff
27W–23L career · no lines in 2024
<1%67%33%
2.94
Elizabeth Garg
3W–3L career · no lines in 2024
2%91%8%
2.80
3
Cecilia Gonzales
49W–89L career · 10 lines in 2024
8%91%2%
2.70
Krissy Dunn
3W–6L career · no lines in 2024
24%76%<1%
2.60
2.5
Areli Grodski
45W–44L career · 6 lines in 2024
0%35%65%
2.55
Kelli Moore
1W–7L career · no lines in 2024
37%63%<1%
2.55

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.