Teams

NJ GREEN

2023 CTA WOMEN'S SUMMER DAYTIME - DEN · WOMEN 4.0 - SUMMER DAYTIME

10 players · average NTRP 3.92 / COLORADO

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 →
Schedule5 played
2023-08-10vs LTA-Q TEALLost 12
L#1 DoublesLeslie Haines / Eve Wall vs Paula Nelsen / Elizabeth Korniczky6-7, 3-6
L#1 SinglesJill Mendoza vs Gretchen Blair2-6, 6-4, 0-1
W#2 DoublesCharlene Bailey / Ann Stafford vs Mona Jones / Kim Kadlic6-3, 4-6, 1-0
2023-08-03vs BRMST YELLOWLost 02
L#1 DoublesMary Jo George / Charlene Bailey vs Ursula Duran / Gail Quinn0-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesDarcie Coy / Eve Wall vs Jacy Bowers / Stacy May5-7, 4-6
2023-07-20vs RMTC NAVYWon 10
W#1 DoublesDarcie Coy / Jill Mendoza vs Chelsea Sump / Jennifer Ufland6-2, 2-6, 1-0
2023-07-13vs LTA-Q GREENWon 20
W#1 DoublesDarcie Coy / Charlene Bailey vs Joyce Kelly / Teri Ohan6-1, 6-3
W#2 DoublesLeslie Haines / Eve Wall vs Dennette Stroh / Debra Heiser6-3, 2-6, 1-0
2023-07-06vs BRMST NAVYLost 01
L#2 DoublesJill Mendoza / Charlene Bailey vs Jane Davis / Jill Long4-6, 6-4, 0-1
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 WOMEN 4.0 - SUMMER DAYTIME 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 3.63 estimated across 8 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.

3.88
Charlene Bailey
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.84
Jill Mendoza
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.83
Darcie Coy
published 4
3.64
Morgan Cox
published
3.56
Eve Wall
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.53
Ann Stafford
published 4
3.47
Leslie Haines
published
3.27
Leigh Hebert
published
Nikole Randolph
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.

Ann Stafford + Darcie Coy7257% games+3.8% vs expected
Charlene Bailey + Darcie Coy5154% games+0.6% vs expected
Leslie Haines + Eve Wall6551% games−0.9% vs expected
Ann Stafford + Nikole Randolph4749% games−1.7% vs expected
Ann Stafford + Leslie Haines2348% games−2.5% vs expected
Ann Stafford + Morgan Cox5356% games−4.9% vs expected
Darcie Coy + Leigh Hebert5162% gamesnot enough data
Sandra Lucero Jacquez + Leigh Hebert224 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
Charlene Bailey
129W–101L career · 4 lines in 2023
<1%81%19%
3.88
4
Jill Mendoza
105W–69L career · 3 lines in 2023
<1%89%10%
3.84
4
Darcie Coy
133W–76L career · no lines in 2023
<1%89%10%
3.83
Morgan Cox
52W–30L career · no lines in 2023
13%86%<1%
3.64
4
Eve Wall
43W–39L career · 3 lines in 2023
32%67%<1%
3.56
4
Ann Stafford
54W–46L career · no lines in 2023
40%60%<1%
3.53
Leslie Haines
48W–65L career · no lines in 2023
60%40%<1%
3.47
3.5
Sandra Lucero Jacquez
36W–55L career · no lines in 2023
2%94%4%
3.27
Leigh Hebert
27W–15L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Nikole Randolph
15W–26L 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.