Teams

WI Low Tri W Doubles (Early Fall) MALT Mavlyutov

2026 WI Tri-Level · WI Low Tri Women Doubles (Early Fall)

10 players · average NTRP 3.60 / WISCONSIN

View scouting list →
Schedule3 played
L#1 DoublesTrish Arreazola / Debbie Schaefer vs Joanna Fisch / Jacqueline Brady1-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesAnne Yates / Dyana Worrell vs Erin Mohrbacker / Lauren Balistreri4-6, 1-6
W#3 DoublesAmy Frederick / Jenniffer Madson vs Joann Martin / Erika Baldwin6-3, 6-3
W#1 DoublesTrish Arreazola / Debbie Schaefer vs Christi Carter / Molly Lubin6-0, 6-1
W#2 DoublesDyana Worrell / Anne Yates vs SOUMYA PALREDDY / Ashley Russell6-4, 6-2
W#3 DoublesHaiyan Zhou / Jenniffer Madson vs Megan Cancila / Natalie Eisner6-0, 6-4
W#1 DoublesDebbie Schaefer / Trish Arreazola vs Paula Riesch / Lisa Kreuser6-1, 7-5
W#2 DoublesYana Mavlyutov / Anne Yates vs Susan Harkness-Shifflett / Molly Moritz7-6, 6-4
W#3 DoublesHaiyan Zhou / Jenniffer Madson vs Jill Bradshaw / Maureen Connors4-6, 6-1, 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 standings4 teams · WI Low Tri Women Doubles (Early Fall)
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1WI Low Tri W Doubles (Early Fall) MALT Mohrbacker103009
2WI Low Tri W Doubles (Early Fall) MALT Mavlyutov1030123
3WI Low Tri W Doubles (Early Fall) MALT Palreddy0103636
4WI Low Tri W Doubles (Early Fall) MALT Bradshaw0103637

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 3.30 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.

3.85
Trish Arreazola
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.59
Debbie Schaefer
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.49
Amy Moy
published 3.5
3.31
Yana Mavlyutov
usually #3 Doubles 86%, also #2 Doubles 14% · published
3.18
Anne Yates
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.07
Jenniffer Madson
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.02
Haiyan Zhou
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.89
Jessie Guo
published
Amy Frederick
published 3
Pamela Keiner
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.

Yana Mavlyutov + Anne Yates314 matchesnot enough data
Trish Arreazola + Debbie Schaefer213 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
Trish Arreazola
51W–57L career · 3 lines in 2026
1%85%14%
3.85
4
Debbie Schaefer
96W–84L career · 3 lines in 2026
25%75%<1%
3.59
3.5
Amy Moy
38W–29L career · no lines in 2026
<1%53%47%
3.49
Yana Mavlyutov
87W–115L career · 7 lines in 2026
1%90%9%
3.31
3.5
Anne Yates
8W–10L career · type S · 3 lines in 2026
9%89%1%
3.18
Jenniffer Madson
39W–23L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%32%68%
3.07
Haiyan Zhou
36W–39L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%45%55%
3.02
Jessie Guo
21W–13L career · no lines in 2026
<1%78%22%
2.89
3
Amy Frederick
1W–17L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
Pamela Keiner
18W–8L career · no lines in 2026
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.