Teams

DeGioia

2023 Frederick Tri-Level 18 & Over · Tri-Level Women 4.0, 3.5, 3.0

14 players · average NTRP 3.70 / MARYLAND

View scouting list →
Schedule2 played
2023-11-18Won 10
W#1 DoublesMekkla Thompson / Lauren Kramer vs Angie Martin / Stephanie Almeida6-2, 6-2
2023-11-09Lost 01
L#1 DoublesMekkla Thompson / Elona Novitski vs Cecelia Biesecker / Jana Conigliaro3-6, 3-4
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 Tri-Level Women 4.0, 3.5, 3.0 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 3.24 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.

3.94
Mekkla Thompson
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.84
Jodi Hathaway
usually #2 Doubles 46%, also #3 Doubles 46% · published 4
Elona Novitski
published 4
3.58
Amy LaMoure
usually #1 Doubles 64%, also #2 Doubles 36% · published 4
3.48
Roxanna Nemec
usually #3 Doubles 54%, also #1 Doubles 31% · published 4
3.30
Traci Bidinger
published
3.12
Kristin Ostlie
usually #1 Doubles 54%, also #2 Doubles 46% · published 3.5
3.03
Hilary Broder
published 3.5
3.01
Esther Wang
published 3.5
3.00
Rebecca DeGioia
usually #1 Doubles 41%, also #2 Doubles 41% · published 3.5
2.92
Kathy Greene
published
2.86
Jennifer Willie
published
2.83
Catherine Iosue
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 38% · published 3
Lauren Kramer
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.

Jodi Hathaway + Roxanna Nemec91050% games+5.0% vs expected
Amy LaMoure + Roxanna Nemec9653% games−0.6% vs expected
Rebecca DeGioia + Jodi Hathaway7454% gamesnot enough data
Amy LaMoure + Kristin Ostlie4551% gamesnot enough data
Rebecca DeGioia + Kristin Ostlie3251% gamesnot enough data
Amy LaMoure + Jodi Hathaway1440% gamesnot enough data
Kristin Ostlie + Roxanna Nemec4162% gamesnot enough data
Jennifer Willie + Rebecca DeGioia224 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
Mekkla Thompson
161W–109L career · 2 lines in 2023
<1%67%32%
3.94
4
Jodi Hathaway
187W–146L career · 11 lines in 2023
<1%89%11%
3.84
4
Elona Novitski
0W–2L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
4
Amy LaMoure
172W–217L career · 14 lines in 2023
28%72%<1%
3.58
4
Roxanna Nemec
199W–122L career · 13 lines in 2023
57%43%<1%
3.48
Traci Bidinger
3W–2L career · no lines in 2023
94%6%<1%
3.30
3.5
Kristin Ostlie
203W–230L career · 13 lines in 2023
18%82%<1%
3.12
3.5
Hilary Broder
4W–14L career · no lines in 2023
42%58%<1%
3.03
3.5
Esther Wang
2W–1L career · no lines in 2023
48%52%<1%
3.01
3.5
Rebecca DeGioia
124W–169L career · 17 lines in 2023
50%50%<1%
3.00
Kathy Greene
31W–13L career · no lines in 2023
<1%74%26%
2.92
Jennifer Willie
28W–17L career · no lines in 2023
<1%86%14%
2.86
3
Catherine Iosue
128W–113L career · 8 lines in 2023
1%90%9%
2.83
Lauren Kramer
3W–0L career · no lines in 2023
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.