Teams

Edg-Higgins

2022 One Doubles · 3.0 Women

6 players · average NTRP 3.08 / NORTHWEST WASHINGTON

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
2022-08-03vs KCMWon 10
W#1 DoublesLaura Rochford / Barbara Smith vs Kristy Charles / Michele Rasmussen6-1, 6-7, 1-0
2022-07-26vs ChangWon 10
W#1 DoublesLaura Rochford / Barbara Smith vs Kaori Yamada / Priscilla Yow6-4, 1-6, 1-0
2022-07-19vs Leahy-Won 10
W#1 DoublesCarmen Pong / Mary Adkins vs Lauren Leahy / Camille Elliott5-7, 6-1, 1-0
2022-07-14vs Straight SetsLost 01
L#1 DoublesAmy Higgins / Mary Adkins vs Leigh Staddon-Smith / Nur Ozkaraoglu1-6, 6-7
2022-07-08vs O'LearyLost 01
L#1 DoublesCarmen Pong / Sophie Fawcett vs Naomi O'Leary / KC Mattingly-Nelson0-6, 1-6
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 3.0 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 2.73 estimated across 6 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.

3.04
Laura Rochford
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
2.79
Carmen Pong
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.74
Sophie Fawcett
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.73
Amy Higgins
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.63
Mary Adkins
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.47
Barbara Smith
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
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.

Barbara Smith + Laura Rochford7252% games+2.7% vs expected
Amy Higgins + Mary Adkins91049% games+1.3% vs expected
Amy Higgins + Sophie Fawcett5644% games−0.9% vs expected
Barbara Smith + Mary Adkins2349% games−2.3% vs expected
Carmen Pong + Laura Rochford4745% games−3.2% vs expected
Amy Higgins + Carmen Pong2442% games−3.6% vs expected
Carmen Pong + Sophie Fawcett5545% games−5.5% vs expected
Sophie Fawcett + Laura Rochford224 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
Laura Rochford
96W–101L career · type A · 2 lines in 2022
37%63%<1%
3.04
3
Carmen Pong
80W–97L career · 2 lines in 2022
1%93%5%
2.79
3
Sophie Fawcett
67W–72L career · 1 line in 2022
3%95%2%
2.74
3
Amy Higgins
90W–112L career · 1 line in 2022
4%94%2%
2.73
3
Mary Adkins
34W–63L career · 2 lines in 2022
15%85%<1%
2.63
3
Barbara Smith
32W–48L career · 2 lines in 2022
60%40%<1%
2.47

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.