Teams

OK-REG-Madden

18 & Over 2.5, 3.5, & 4.5 Section Championships · 3.5 Women

9 players · average NTRP 3.67 / ST. LOUIS

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 standings8 teams · 3.5 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1HOA-REG-Vitha/18&Over3.5W000000
2NE-REG-Summer Slicers/18&Over3.5W000000
3IA-REG-Michelsen-Reinsch/18&Over3.5W000000
4STL-REG-Malpiedi000000
5OK-REG-Madden000000
6KS-REG-Lane/Klausman/18&Over3.5W000000
7MO-REG-Pell/18&Over3.5W000000
8NEWC-Blake/18&Over3.5W000000

Ordered by team wins, then losses, then sets lost — the order USTA uses to seed a flight. Individual wins are lines, not ties.

See the full flight, with every team’s record

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 3.09 estimated across 7 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.

3.34
Chelsea Ragland
published 4
3.33
Dallas Miller
published 3.5
3.18
Amy High
published 3.5
3.11
Wendy Madden
published
3.08
Leila Fadaiepour
published
2.91
Lucia Chavez
published
2.66
Phyllis Reigh
published
Kim Lewis
published
Sarah Patel
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.

Chelsea Ragland + Sarah Patel4254% games+12.9% vs expected
Wendy Madden + Dallas Miller5166% games+5.5% vs expected
Wendy Madden + Lucia Chavez224 matchesnot enough data
Sarah Patel + Leila Fadaiepour123 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
Chelsea Ragland
57W–41L career · no lines in 2024
87%13%<1%
3.34
3.5
Dallas Miller
121W–77L career · no lines in 2024
1%87%12%
3.33
3.5
Amy High
64W–64L career · no lines in 2024
10%89%1%
3.18
Wendy Madden
76W–60L career · no lines in 2024
<1%22%78%
3.11
Leila Fadaiepour
32W–21L career · no lines in 2024
0%<1%>99%
3.08
Lucia Chavez
78W–36L career · no lines in 2024
0%<1%>99%
2.91
Phyllis Reigh
115W–170L career · no lines in 2024
13%87%1%
2.66
Kim Lewis
47W–23L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Sarah Patel
90W–44L career · no lines in 2024
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.