Teams

WOCC Curdts

2022 Richmond Singles · Richmond Singles 4.0 Women

9 players · average NTRP 4.12 / VIRGINIA

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2022-08-24vs Belmont MorganLost 01
L#3 SinglesSallie Mayer vs Katherine Lawrence3-6, 3-6
2022-08-17Won 10
W#1 SinglesLaura Granger vs Christine Lemons6-1, 6-0
2022-08-16vs Westwood Dunstan / CosbyLost 01
L#2 SinglesAnne Elles vs Meredith Schwartz4-6, 6-7
2022-08-03vs ACAC LewisSplit 11
L#1 SinglesAnne Elles vs Andrea Morrow4-6, 6-4, 0-1
W#3 SinglesSallie Mayer vs Michelle Nelson5-7, 6-4, 1-0
2022-07-27Won 10
W#3 SinglesHeather Garnett vs Molly Newcomb6-4, 6-1
2022-07-20vs CCV BecklerWon 10
W#2 SinglesLaura Granger vs Melissa Mauck6-3, 6-0
2022-07-20vs Belmont MorganWon 10
W#1 SinglesHeather Garnett vs Katherine McDowell6-4, 6-0
2022-07-15vs Belmont BoyleLost 01
L#1 SinglesLaura Granger vs Brooke Kelly4-6, 3-6
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 Richmond Singles 4.0 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 3.81 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.

4.18
Nikki Cheuk
published
3.98
Jessica Morton
published
3.92
Laura Granger
usually #1 Singles 67%, also #2 Singles 33% · published 4.5
3.92
Peyton Curdts
published
3.85
Anne Elles
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #2 Singles 50% · published 4
3.69
Heather Garnett
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #3 Singles 50% · published 4
3.54
Ingrid Hale
published 4
3.36
Sallie Mayer
usually #3 Singles 100% · published
Squig Moore
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.

Heather Garnett + Sallie Mayer11040% gamesnot enough data
Laura Granger + Anne Elles4550% gamesnot enough data
Laura Granger + Sallie Mayer303 matchesnot enough data
Anne Elles + Sallie Mayer213 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.

Nikki Cheuk
2W–3L career · no lines in 2022
8%91%1%
4.18
Jessica Morton
8W–1L career · no lines in 2022
<1%55%45%
3.98
4.5
Laura Granger
131W–99L career · 3 lines in 2022
72%28%<1%
3.92
Peyton Curdts
3W–1L career · no lines in 2022
<1%74%26%
3.92
4
Anne Elles
147W–130L career · 2 lines in 2022
<1%87%13%
3.85
4
Heather Garnett
50W–63L career · 2 lines in 2022
7%92%1%
3.69
4
Ingrid Hale
88W–60L career · no lines in 2022
36%64%<1%
3.54
Sallie Mayer
85W–101L career · 2 lines in 2022
<1%86%14%
3.36
Squig Moore
1W–2L career · no lines 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.