Teams

McLaughlin-Chrenka/Rogers/SVCC

2024 Adult Singles 18 & Over · 3.0 Women

7 players · average NTRP 3.50 / ARKANSAS

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2025-02-01vs Erickson/Springdale/INDWon 30
W#1 SinglesShangwen Huang vs Kristen Doll6-3, 5-7, 1-0
W#2 SinglesBrooke Bricker vs Samantha Thiede Erickson6-3, 6-4
W#3 SinglesTiffany Harris vs Lacey Baker6-4, 6-3
2025-01-11vs Snell/Rogers/MRCLost 12
W#1 SinglesShangwen Huang vs Abby Bell6-2, 6-4
L#2 SinglesBrooke Bricker vs Heather Snell3-6, 6-3, 0-1
L#3 SinglesKayla McLaughlin vs Natalie Anderson2-6, 1-6
2024-12-11vs Hanus/Rogers/PCCWon 30
W#1 SinglesLaurel Schley vs Lisa Bores6-1, 6-0
W#2 SinglesNur Kamilah Chrenka vs Kathryn Stark6-1, 6-2
W#3 SinglesKayla McLaughlin vs Amanda Philpot6-2, 6-0
2024-11-20vs Erickson/Springdale/INDWon 21
W#1 SinglesLaurel Schley vs Grace McCasland6-0, 6-0
W#2 SinglesDeanna Cicatiello vs Madison Kendall6-1, 6-1
L#3 SinglesKayla McLaughlin vs Monte Broussard4-6, 2-6
2024-11-17vs Bertram/Fayetteville/SRCLost 03
L#1 SinglesTiffany Harris vs Natalie Mayer6-3, 1-6, 0-1
L#2 SinglesBrooke Bricker vs Maria Rene Arandia Jimenez3-6, 6-3, 0-1
L#3 SinglesDeanna Cicatiello vs Sydney Adair2-6, 3-6
2024-11-13vs Weber/Farmington/FACWon 21
W#1 SinglesLaurel Schley vs Jennifer Tarnasky6-2, 6-2
L#2 SinglesNur Kamilah Chrenka vs Callie Brannon6-4, 4-6, 0-1
W#3 SinglesShangwen Huang vs Susan Murray7-6, 6-2
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 3.24 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.

3.58
Laurel Schley
usually #1 Singles 67%, also #2 Singles 33% · published
3.21
Nur Kamilah Chrenka
usually #2 Singles 75%, also #1 Singles 25% · published
3.20
Brooke Bricker
usually #2 Singles 100% · published 3.5
3.20
Deanna Cicatiello
usually #3 Singles 50%, also #2 Singles 50% · published 3.5
3.17
Shangwen Huang
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #3 Singles 33% · published
3.10
Tiffany Harris
usually #3 Singles 60%, also #1 Singles 20% · published
Kayla McLaughlin
usually #3 Singles 100% · published
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.

Laurel Schley
18W–3L career · 6 lines in 2024
29%71%<1%
3.58
Nur Kamilah Chrenka
17W–9L career · 4 lines in 2024
7%91%2%
3.21
3.5
Brooke Bricker
17W–15L career · 3 lines in 2024
7%91%2%
3.20
3.5
Deanna Cicatiello
18W–30L career · 2 lines in 2024
8%91%2%
3.20
Shangwen Huang
13W–17L career · 6 lines in 2024
11%88%1%
3.17
Tiffany Harris
23W–22L career · 5 lines in 2024
25%75%<1%
3.10
Kayla McLaughlin
3W–6L career · 3 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.