Teams

Grynaviski - Lob it Like its Hot

2025 Montgomery Doubles Fall Women · Montgomery Doubles Fall 3.5 Women

15 players · average NTRP 3.12 / MARYLAND

View scouting list →

Flight standings for Montgomery Doubles Fall 3.5 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 2.70 estimated across 9 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.

Beverly Webster
published 3.5
2.92
Debbie Tang
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.91
Hayley Flack
published
2.87
Leah Getlan
published
2.79
Mara Nelson-Grynaviski
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.71
Hedy Klotz
published
2.65
Nancy Pinto
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.56
Allison Fishkind
published 3
2.55
Stacy Ferguson
published
2.38
Annie Hauer
published 3
Emily Murray
published
Erinn Locaria
published
Kristen Gold
published
Lauren Scher
published
Shara Reiter
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.

Mara Nelson-Grynaviski + Debbie Tang4259% games+14.2% vs expected
Hayley Flack + Stacy Ferguson4446% games−3.1% vs expected
Erinn Locaria + Kristen Gold033 matchesnot enough data
Mara Nelson-Grynaviski + Hayley Flack213 matchesnot enough data
Hedy Klotz + Leah Getlan123 matchesnot enough data
Shara Reiter + Emily Murray213 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
Beverly Webster
2W–2L career · type S · no lines in 2025
not enough data
3
Debbie Tang
8W–3L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%73%27%
2.92
Hayley Flack
10W–10L career · no lines in 2025
<1%73%26%
2.91
Leah Getlan
1W–6L career · no lines in 2025
<1%83%17%
2.87
Mara Nelson-Grynaviski
12W–7L career · 1 line in 2025
2%92%6%
2.79
Hedy Klotz
3W–7L career · no lines in 2025
7%91%2%
2.71
Nancy Pinto
11W–7L career · 2 lines in 2025
15%85%1%
2.65
3
Allison Fishkind
2W–3L career · type S · no lines in 2025
34%66%<1%
2.56
Stacy Ferguson
6W–10L career · no lines in 2025
37%63%<1%
2.55
3
Annie Hauer
3W–6L career · type S · no lines in 2025
81%19%<1%
2.38
Emily Murray
3W–2L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Erinn Locaria
1W–4L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Kristen Gold
2W–4L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Lauren Scher
0W–4L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Shara Reiter
5W–1L 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.