Teams

KY/LOU/MORRIS/RECHTER

2025 USTA LEAGUE 18 & Over ADULT LOUISVILLE · 4.5 Women

12 players · average NTRP 4.10 / KENTUCKY

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
2025-02-26vs KY/LOU/BROWNFIELD/OCONNELLLost 12
L#1 DoublesDanielle Jones / Sherry Lafferty vs Suzanne Bush / Cheryl Frazee6-2, 5-7, 0-1
W#1 SinglesBounthavy Hill vs Maggi Donnell6-4, 6-1
L#2 SinglesAmanda Rassiga vs Morgan Meyer3-6, 6-4, 0-1
2025-01-15vs KY/LOU/LAMPTON/KULLLost 02
L#1 SinglesAndi Ramser vs Tracy Lattis6-7, 4-6
L#3 DoublesRebekkah Rechter / Amanda Rassiga vs Natalie Kjellman / Shannon Lampton2-6, 0-6
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 4.5 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 3.70 estimated across 10 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.

Ana Videa
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 4.5
3.93
Cara Robinson
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Singles 25% · published 4
3.86
Kathleen Berghausen
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.76
Sherry Lafferty
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.75
Andi Ramser
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 4
3.70
Holly Meadows
published
3.65
Jennifer Dickerson
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.63
Laura Gaviglio
usually #2 Singles 100% · published
3.59
Amanda Rassiga
usually #2 Singles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.59
Rebekkah Rechter
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
3.52
Bounthavy Hill
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 4
Michea Dicken
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.

Rebekkah Rechter + Jennifer Dickerson5948% games−3.0% vs expected
Jennifer Dickerson + Holly Meadows213 matchesnot enough data
Michea Dicken + Holly Meadows213 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.

4.5
Ana Videa
3W–1L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
4
Cara Robinson
28W–19L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%68%32%
3.93
Kathleen Berghausen
27W–17L career · 4 lines in 2025
1%84%15%
3.86
Sherry Lafferty
8W–10L career · 1 line in 2025
3%92%4%
3.76
4
Andi Ramser
15W–13L career · 1 line in 2025
4%93%4%
3.75
Holly Meadows
7W–6L career · no lines in 2025
7%91%2%
3.70
Jennifer Dickerson
24W–31L career · 3 lines in 2025
13%86%1%
3.65
Laura Gaviglio
14W–15L career · 4 lines in 2025
>99%<1%<1%
3.63
4
Amanda Rassiga
8W–15L career · 2 lines in 2025
26%74%<1%
3.59
Rebekkah Rechter
16W–31L career · 4 lines in 2025
27%73%<1%
3.59
4
Bounthavy Hill
17W–31L career · 2 lines in 2025
43%56%<1%
3.52
Michea Dicken
4W–3L career · no lines in 2025
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.