Teams

Nichols- Nich-Jac Fall 3.5 Monday

2021 ADULT 18 & OVER EARLY START · 3.5 WOMEN

15 players · average NTRP 3.42 / NORTHERN

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 →
Schedule5 played
2020-11-16vs Sundick- ORCC WomenWon 10
W#2 DoublesLori Anne Emlong / Cheri Jacoby vs Maddy Persuitti / Cassie Benowitz6-1, 6-4
L#3 DoublesLori Anne Emlong / Lauri Garvey vs Emily Starita / Joanie Gold4-6, 4-6
2020-11-02vs Harris-Brown SwingtownLost 01
L#2 DoublesLauri Garvey / Lori Anne Emlong vs Brigitte Schiller / Nancy Paulson4-6, 3-6
2020-10-26vs Sundick- ORCC WomenWon 10
W#3 DoublesLauri Garvey / Lori Anne Emlong vs Betsy Michel / Karen Knapp6-1, 6-3
2020-10-05vs Sundick- ORCC WomenWon 10
W#3 DoublesLori Anne Emlong / Lauri Garvey vs Sheri Abrams / Natalie Zamansky6-3, 7-6
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 3.5 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 3.14 estimated across 9 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.

3.49
Hannah Olson
published 4
3.45
Lori Anne Emlong
usually #3 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
3.42
Jessica Yineman
published
Angie Mortenson
published 3.5
3.04
Michelle Sandberg
published
3.04
Cheri Jacoby
published 3.5
3.00
Christina Farrell
published 3.5
2.98
Sherri Nichols
published
2.96
Shagu Heal
published
2.88
Lorie Korpi
published
Barbara Noble
published 2.5
Jennifer Coin
published
Lauri Garvey
published
Sandra Waryan
published
Sharon Chambers
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.

Shagu Heal + Michelle Sandberg2641% games−7.9% vs expected
Sherri Nichols + Lorie Korpi5068% gamesnot 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
Hannah Olson
2W–3L career · type S · no lines in 2021
54%46%<1%
3.49
3.5
Lori Anne Emlong
132W–83L career · 5 lines in 2021
<1%65%35%
3.45
Jessica Yineman
7W–8L career · no lines in 2021
72%28%<1%
3.42
3.5
Angie Mortenson
0W–3L career · no lines in 2021
not enough data
Michelle Sandberg
7W–12L career · no lines in 2021
37%63%<1%
3.04
3.5
Cheri Jacoby
18W–36L career · no lines in 2021
39%61%<1%
3.04
3.5
Christina Farrell
3W–14L career · no lines in 2021
49%51%<1%
3.00
Sherri Nichols
7W–3L career · no lines in 2021
<1%57%43%
2.98
Shagu Heal
9W–19L career · no lines in 2021
63%37%<1%
2.96
Lorie Korpi
14W–11L career · no lines in 2021
<1%82%18%
2.88
2.5
Barbara Noble
3W–9L career · type M · no lines in 2021
not enough data
Jennifer Coin
0W–1L career · no lines in 2021
not enough data
Lauri Garvey
0W–8L career · no lines in 2021
not enough data
Sandra Waryan
0W–4L career · no lines in 2021
not enough data
Sharon Chambers
5W–7L career · no lines in 2021
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.