Teams

Murray Hill 2

2022 18&over Women Day Winter · 3.0

12 players · average NTRP 3.50 / NEW JERSEY REGION

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 →
Schedule2 played
2022-02-01vs NJ: Centercourt EdgeWon 31
W#1 DoublesKelly Hillyer / Abby Manning vs Carla Spear / Renee Horan6-3, 6-1
L#1 SinglesTori Bolger vs Jennifer Douglas7-6, 3-5, 0-1
W#2 DoublesNicki Mullin / Katie Orr vs Madhuri Reddy / Dina Ferluge6-2, 6-0
W#3 DoublesVanessa Mulligan / Hally Seminara vs Caitlin Smith / Colleen Uhl6-3, 7-6
2022-01-18vs Glam SlamWon 21
W#1 DoublesNicki Mullin / Hally Seminara vs Niki Chen / Frances Longo7-5, 5-7, 1-0
W#1 SinglesAbby Manning vs Malini Lakhani6-3, 6-1
L#2 DoublesKelly Hillyer / Katie Orr vs Norma Anderson / SAMANTHA NAFTAL1-6, 6-3, 0-1
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 3.0 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.

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.

Abby Manning
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
Amanda Wipperman
published
Erin Davies
published
Hally Seminara
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
Jill Wehler
published
Kelly Hillyer
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
Keri Kociancic
published
Maria Brugg
published
Megan Rosenblum
published
Nicki Mullin
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
Tori Bolger
usually #1 Singles 100% · published
Vanessa Mulligan
usually #3 Doubles 100% · 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.

Tori Bolger + Kelly Hillyer123 matchesnot enough data
Abby Manning + Kelly Hillyer213 matchesnot enough data
Abby Manning + Nicki Mullin213 matchesnot enough data
Kelly Hillyer + Nicki Mullin303 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.

3.5
Abby Manning
22W–15L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
Amanda Wipperman
1W–1L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Erin Davies
1W–1L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Hally Seminara
2W–0L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
Jill Wehler
0W–2L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Kelly Hillyer
9W–6L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
Keri Kociancic
4W–16L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Maria Brugg
0W–1L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Megan Rosenblum
2W–0L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Nicki Mullin
29W–5L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
Tori Bolger
4W–7L career · 1 line in 2022
not enough data
Vanessa Mulligan
3W–0L career · 1 line in 2022
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.