Teams

CYu-ENO

2025 Eno River Singles 18 & Over · 18 & Over Singles 4.0 Women Evening

8 players · average NTRP 3.94 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2025-07-12vs CCouto-HRLost 01
L#1 SinglesKelsey Kowalski vs Mary Feger4-6, 1-6
2025-07-01vs CYu2-ENOWon 20
W#2 SinglesMary Clare Rosemeyer vs Katie Evans6-0, 6-1
W#3 SinglesMegan Chiles vs Karen Reynders6-2, 6-2
2025-06-30vs MLong-ENOWon 20
W#1 SinglesLina Habib vs Corinne Haywood6-2, 6-4
W#2 SinglesKelsey Kowalski vs Betsy Soltesz6-3, 6-1
2025-06-09vs MLong-ENOWon 20
W#2 SinglesLina Habib vs Dallas Knight6-0, 6-3
W#3 SinglesMary Clare Rosemeyer vs Corinne Haywood6-2, 6-4
2025-06-02vs SFranks-ENOWon 10
W#1 SinglesBriana Oliver vs Cathy Joyce6-4, 1-6, 1-0
2025-05-25vs Post-Rust/McGill-DFCWon 20
W#1 SinglesBriana Oliver vs Christa McGill6-0, 6-0
W#2 SinglesLina Habib vs Laura Carlson6-1, 6-3
2025-05-19vs KPollak-ENOWon 20
W#1 SinglesBriana Oliver vs Betsy Shane6-4, 6-1
W#3 SinglesMegan Chiles vs Kathryn Pollak7-6, 6-0
2025-05-05vs HRoss-ENOSplit 11
L#1 SinglesMary Clare Rosemeyer vs Carrie Guthrie5-7, 3-6
W#3 SinglesKelsey Kowalski vs Justyne Ross4-6, 6-3, 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 standings for 18 & Over Singles 4.0 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 3.85 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.

4.07
Mary Clare Rosemeyer
usually #1 Singles 33%, also #3 Singles 33% · published 4
3.98
3.98
Kelsey Kowalski
usually #3 Singles 33%, also #2 Singles 33% · published 4
3.97
Caroline Yu
published 4
3.86
Briana Oliver
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 4
3.80
Lina Habib
usually #2 Singles 67%, also #1 Singles 33% · published 4
3.80
Megan Chiles
usually #3 Singles 100% · published 4
3.33
Anita Yang
published 3.5
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.

Caroline Yu + Megan Chiles213 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
Mary Clare Rosemeyer
123W–43L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%31%69%
4.07
4
Ekaterina Seregina
31W–3L career · no lines in 2025
<1%57%43%
3.98
4
Kelsey Kowalski
78W–64L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%57%43%
3.98
4
Caroline Yu
27W–19L career · no lines in 2025
<1%60%40%
3.97
4
Briana Oliver
36W–22L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%86%14%
3.86
4
Lina Habib
38W–41L career · 3 lines in 2025
1%93%6%
3.80
4
Megan Chiles
155W–47L career · 2 lines in 2025
1%93%6%
3.80
3.5
Anita Yang
2W–14L career · no lines in 2025
1%90%10%
3.33

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.