Teams

CP GOLD

2026 USTA ADULT 18 & OVER - DEN · WOMEN 3.5 - 18 & OVER

11 players · average NTRP 3.38 / COLORADO

No matches recorded for this roster in this league — it may be a placeholder registration, or the season may not have started.

View scouting list →
Schedule7 played
2026-05-28vs DTC PURPLEWon 40
W#1 DoublesEsther Song / Emily Rugaber vs Brooke Grey / Annette Isham2-6, 6-2, 1-0
W#1 SinglesMadison Hines vs Chrysie Ready6-3, 6-3
W#2 DoublesCeline Drochon / Brittany Boselli vs Rebecca Wulliman / Julie Underdahl7-5, 6-1
W#3 DoublesAmy Bailey / Claire Cornell vs Ashley Daidone / Meredith Suter6-1, 2-6, 1-0
2026-05-23vs WP SILVERWon 41
W#1 DoublesEsther Song / Emily Rugaber vs Kathleen McKern / Sarah Gordon6-2, 6-0
W#1 SinglesMadison Hines vs Cynthia Lopez6-3, 6-4
L#2 DoublesNicoal Sperrazza / Janet Hajek vs Lynn LaTorre / Julia Dunn6-4, 3-6, 0-1
W#2 SinglesCarrie Palmer vs Madeline Robertson6-1, 3-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesCeline Drochon / Claire Cornell vs Emily Reinhart / Sasha Stramel6-2, 6-0
2026-05-21vs CM BLUEWon 41
W#1 DoublesEsther Song / Emily Rugaber vs Romi Hovey / Lea VanSchaack4-6, 6-3, 1-0
W#1 SinglesMadison Hines vs Taylor Pardun6-3, 6-3
W#2 DoublesCarrie Palmer / Claire Cornell vs Cindy Sawyer / Jeannette Tighe6-1, 6-4
W#2 SinglesMeghan McManus vs Skye McCrimmon6-1, 6-1
L#3 DoublesNicoal Sperrazza / Janet Hajek vs Megan Fredricks / Michelle Eidson6-7, 7-6, 0-1
2026-05-14vs CACM BLUEWon 31
W#1 DoublesBrittany Boselli / Celine Drochon vs Heather Mitchell / Jodi Brown1-6, 6-2, 1-0
L#2 DoublesCarrie Palmer / Amy Bailey vs Sarah Jensik / Serena Sampat6-7, 0-6
W#2 SinglesMadison Hines vs Leslie Greer6-1, 6-2
W#3 DoublesNicoal Sperrazza / Janet Hajek vs Heather Johnson / Charlotte Gillespie6-4, 6-3
2026-05-03vs WP GREENSplit 22
L#1 DoublesEsther Song / Emily Rugaber vs Nghi Hoang / Emma Tiernon2-6, 6-7
L#2 DoublesCarrie Palmer / Amy Bailey vs Kim Weeks / Brae Holdridge6-4, 2-6, 0-1
W#2 SinglesMeghan McManus vs Shannon Whitley7-5, 6-4
W#3 DoublesJanet Hajek / Nicoal Sperrazza vs Dana Breitenstein / Meredith Giske7-5, 6-0
2026-04-30vs GTC REDLost 13
L#1 DoublesEmily Rugaber / Carrie Palmer vs Molly Burke / Allison Abrams2-6, 7-6, 0-1
W#1 SinglesMeghan McManus vs Alice Choe6-2, 6-1
L#2 DoublesJanet Hajek / Nicoal Sperrazza vs Geetha Sivanandam / Maeve Cohen3-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesClaire Cornell / Amy Bailey vs Jenn Roedel / Caroline Blakney3-6, 3-6
2026-04-16vs NJ REDWon 30
W#1 DoublesBrittany Boselli / Celine Drochon vs Tara Hammar / Erin Manzolillo7-5, 4-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesEsther Song / Emily Rugaber vs Kris Hansen / April DeLauro7-6, 6-3
W#3 DoublesClaire Cornell / Amy Bailey vs Lydia Pistol / Renee Richker6-3, 7-5
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 WOMEN 3.5 - 18 & OVER 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 3.25 estimated across 11 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.

3.55
Meghan McManus
usually #2 Singles 67%, also #1 Singles 33% · published
3.49
Madison Hines
usually #1 Singles 75%, also #2 Singles 25% · published
3.37
Celine Drochon
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.33
Brittany Boselli
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.33
Emily Rugaber
usually #1 Doubles 83%, also #2 Doubles 17% · published 3.5
3.28
Amy Bailey
usually #3 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
3.27
Janet Hajek
usually #3 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
3.10
Claire Cornell
usually #3 Doubles 80%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published 3
3.07
Carrie Palmer
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #2 Singles 20% · published 3.5
3.07
Esther Song
usually #1 Doubles 80%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published
2.90
Nicoal Sperrazza
usually #3 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · 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.

Carrie Palmer + Emily Rugaber2351% games+9.8% vs expected
Nicoal Sperrazza + Janet Hajek6752% games+9.3% vs expected
Carrie Palmer + Amy Bailey6650% games+3.1% vs expected
Emily Rugaber + Esther Song81245% games−0.9% vs expected
Brittany Boselli + Celine Drochon10652% games−1.1% vs expected
Claire Cornell + Nicoal Sperrazza1449% gamesnot enough data
Amy Bailey + Claire Cornell314 matchesnot enough data
Carrie Palmer + Esther Song213 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.

Meghan McManus
8W–0L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%37%63%
3.55
Madison Hines
6W–2L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%52%48%
3.49
3.5
Celine Drochon
20W–10L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%81%18%
3.37
3.5
Brittany Boselli
13W–11L career · 3 lines in 2026
1%88%11%
3.33
3.5
Emily Rugaber
40W–37L career · 6 lines in 2026
1%88%11%
3.33
3.5
Amy Bailey
13W–13L career · 5 lines in 2026
2%92%5%
3.28
3.5
Janet Hajek
9W–16L career · 5 lines in 2026
3%92%5%
3.27
3
Claire Cornell
18W–21L career · 5 lines in 2026
<1%24%76%
3.10
3.5
Carrie Palmer
20W–15L career · 5 lines in 2026
31%69%<1%
3.07
Esther Song
15W–22L career · 5 lines in 2026
31%69%<1%
3.07
3
Nicoal Sperrazza
33W–53L career · 5 lines in 2026
<1%76%24%
2.90

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.