Teams

Bryan

2022 Montgomery Combo Fall · Montgomery Combo Fall 8.5 Women

17 players · average NTRP 4.14 / MARYLAND

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 →

Flight standings for Montgomery Combo Fall 8.5 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 3.80 estimated across 14 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.

4.23
Anne Jagodits
usually #1 Doubles 80%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published 4.5
4.16
Loretta Sevier
published
4.14
Shelena Sanderson
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 4.5
3.94
Catalina Tafur
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4.5
3.93
Kayley Duval
published
3.78
Debra Dager
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.73
Ele Pratt
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.71
Cece Finan
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.69
Mary Papadopulos
usually #2 Doubles 78%, also #1 Doubles 22% · published 4
3.60
Carolina Posada
published 4
3.60
Christine Bragale
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.59
Banu Karimi-Shah
published 4
3.57
3.47
Michelle Bryan
published
Katya White
published
Malika Rasheed
published
Wendy Carey
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.

Anne Jagodits + Cece Finan3263% gamesnot enough data
Anne Jagodits + Mary Papadopulos2349% gamesnot enough data
Anne Jagodits + Shelena Sanderson4152% gamesnot enough data
Cece Finan + Catalina Tafur1444% gamesnot enough data
Catalina Tafur + Christine Bragale0532% gamesnot enough data
Cece Finan + Debra Dager224 matchesnot enough data
Anne Jagodits + Catalina Tafur033 matchesnot enough data
Cece Finan + Christine Bragale213 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
Anne Jagodits
208W–213L career · 5 lines in 2022
4%94%2%
4.23
Loretta Sevier
20W–10L career · no lines in 2022
12%88%<1%
4.16
4.5
Shelena Sanderson
199W–141L career · 3 lines in 2022
15%85%<1%
4.14
4.5
Catalina Tafur
114W–169L career · 3 lines in 2022
68%32%<1%
3.94
Kayley Duval
6W–20L career · no lines in 2022
70%30%<1%
3.93
4
Debra Dager
47W–53L career · 4 lines in 2022
1%94%5%
3.78
4
Ele Pratt
102W–79L career · type M · 4 lines in 2022
4%94%2%
3.73
4
Cece Finan
67W–78L career · 4 lines in 2022
5%93%1%
3.71
4
Mary Papadopulos
178W–103L career · 9 lines in 2022
7%92%1%
3.69
4
Carolina Posada
18W–10L career · no lines in 2022
22%78%<1%
3.60
4
Christine Bragale
96W–194L career · 3 lines in 2022
23%77%<1%
3.60
4
Banu Karimi-Shah
3W–5L career · no lines in 2022
25%75%<1%
3.59
4
Christine Oconnor
5W–6L career · no lines in 2022
29%71%<1%
3.57
Michelle Bryan
3W–13L career · no lines in 2022
60%40%<1%
3.47
Katya White
27W–33L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Malika Rasheed
0W–2L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Wendy Carey
7W–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.