Teams

Fletcher - Sets on the Beach

2025 Charlottesville Singles · Charlottesville Singles 3.5 Women

7 players · average NTRP 3.25 / VIRGINIA

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2025-10-22Won 10
W#2 SinglesMaren Ward vs Michelle Ruiz3-6, 6-3, 1-0
2025-10-16Won 10
W#3 SinglesSusie Abramson vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2025-10-08vs BHSC- RyanLost 01
L#2 SinglesSusie Abramson vs Kelly Lindauer6-7, 0-6
2025-10-01vs Faulconer Saul- FarmingtonWon 21
L#1 SinglesLori Gagnon vs Kendall Southmayd5-7, 2-6
W#2 SinglesMaggie Nguyen vs Caroline Faulconer Saul7-6, 7-6
W#3 SinglesMary Primm vs Anne Barger6-3, 6-2
2025-09-25vs Furlow - Forest LakesLost 12
L#1 SinglesLori Gagnon vs Jennifer Perkinson0-6, 4-6
W#2 SinglesMary Primm vs Courtney Heyward7-5, 5-7, 1-0
L#3 SinglesGillian Grant vs Michelle Ruiz0-6, 4-6
2025-09-18vs Bayliss - ACAC Simply SmashingLost 01
L#2 SinglesSusie Abramson vs Pamela Jupin5-7, 4-6
2025-09-04vs BHSC- RyanLost 01
L#3 SinglesMaren Ward vs Taylor Kelley0-6, 3-6
2025-08-28vs Faulconer Saul- FarmingtonWon 10
W#3 SinglesSusie Abramson vs Loring Woodriff6-3, 6-1
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 Charlottesville Singles 3.5 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 3.12 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.

3.34
Mary Primm
usually #2 Singles 50%, also #3 Singles 50% · published 3.5
3.25
Susie Abramson
usually #3 Singles 50%, also #2 Singles 50% · published 3.5
3.19
Maren Ward
usually #1 Singles 60%, also #3 Singles 20% · published 3
3.15
Lori Gagnon
usually #1 Singles 100% · published
2.96
Maggie Nguyen
usually #2 Singles 100% · published
2.82
Gillian Grant
usually #3 Singles 67%, also #1 Singles 33% · published 3
Jane Fletcher
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.

Mary Primm + Susie Abramson6258% gamesnot enough data
Mary Primm + Maren Ward314 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.

3.5
Mary Primm
43W–26L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%89%10%
3.34
3.5
Susie Abramson
32W–33L career · 4 lines in 2025
3%95%3%
3.25
3
Maren Ward
99W–67L career · 5 lines in 2025
<1%8%92%
3.19
Lori Gagnon
4W–8L career · 2 lines in 2025
12%88%<1%
3.15
Maggie Nguyen
5W–20L career · 1 line in 2025
61%39%<1%
2.96
3
Gillian Grant
16W–11L career · 3 lines in 2025
1%91%8%
2.82
Jane Fletcher
0W–1L career · no lines in 2025
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.