Teams

SMacVicar (Raintree)

2023 Singles 18 & Over League · 18 & Over Singles 2.5 Women - Mon PM

7 players · average NTRP 2.62 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2023-07-24vs LTian (Queens)Lost 01
L#1 SinglesCarmen Lettre vs Crystal Allen6-2, 4-6, 0-1
2023-07-17vs EScoville (Raintree)Won 20
W#1 SinglesSuzanne MacVicar vs Marie Foley2-6, 6-4, 1-0
W#2 SinglesCarmen Lettre vs Emily Ladky6-0, 6-1
2023-07-10vs GElden (Blakeney)Won 10
W#1 SinglesSuzanne MacVicar vs Monica Larios6-4, 7-6
2023-07-05Lost 01
L#1 SinglesCarmen Lettre vs Lei Tian1-6, 5-7
2023-06-26vs EScoville (Raintree)Lost 01
L#1 SinglesCrissa Klein vs Chelsea Law6-2, 2-6, 0-1
2023-06-25vs LTian (Queens)Won 20
W#1 SinglesCrissa Klein vs Mallory Burns6-1, 6-1
W#2 SinglesLisa Carmichael vs Crystal Allen6-3, 4-6, 1-0
2023-06-24vs GElden (Blakeney)Won 21
L#1 SinglesCrissa Klein vs Ashlee Pickering4-6, 6-7
W#2 SinglesSuzanne MacVicar vs Diane DeMus6-0, 6-3
W#3 SinglesLisa Carmichael vs Maureen Polonus6-0, 6-0
2023-06-05vs EScoville (Raintree)Lost 01
L#1 SinglesLisa Carmichael vs Chelsea Law2-6, 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 18 & Over Singles 2.5 Women - Mon PM 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 2.45 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.

2.83
Suzanne MacVicar
usually #1 Singles 67%, also #2 Singles 33% · published 3
2.51
Lisa Carmichael
usually #1 Singles 33%, also #3 Singles 33% · published 2.5
2.43
Crissa Klein
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 2.5
2.40
Melissa Orr
published
2.33
Carmen Lettre
usually #1 Singles 67%, also #2 Singles 33% · published 2.5
2.17
Jennifer Tucker
published
Kinzie Bashline
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.

Suzanne MacVicar + Crissa Klein5552% games+5.2% vs expected
Crissa Klein + Lisa Carmichael3354% gamesnot enough data
Carmen Lettre + Jennifer Tucker134 matchesnot enough data
Suzanne MacVicar + Lisa Carmichael303 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
Suzanne MacVicar
89W–101L career · 3 lines in 2023
<1%89%10%
2.83
2.5
Lisa Carmichael
37W–38L career · 3 lines in 2023
0%48%52%
2.51
2.5
Crissa Klein
50W–62L career · 3 lines in 2023
0%71%29%
2.43
Melissa Orr
13W–18L career · no lines in 2023
78%22%<1%
2.40
2.5
Carmen Lettre
26W–51L career · 3 lines in 2023
0%91%9%
2.33
Jennifer Tucker
6W–27L career · no lines in 2023
0%99%1%
2.17
Kinzie Bashline
1W–14L career · no lines in 2023
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.