Teams

Glen Creek

Advancing Tri-Level · 4.5 Women

19 players · average NTRP 3.88 / ALLEGHENY MNTN.

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
2023-12-10vs OxfordSplit 11
L#1 DoublesLori Baran / Kirsten Rydstrom vs Rajeeta Bazaz / Ann Graff4-6, 7-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesAndrea Keck / Jennifer Fell vs Nancy Mueller / Sophia Zhang7-5, 6-4
2023-11-11vs PTASplit 11
L#1 DoublesMelissa Bailey / Carla Babe vs Heather Gallagher / Abigail McCormick4-6, 3-6
W#3 DoublesAndrea Keck / Gina DeCola vs Virginia Molitor / Arla Baker6-2, 6-4
2023-11-05vs OxfordLost 02
L#1 DoublesKara Ferner / Linda van Roosmalen vs Stephanie Crowley / Janelle Kotyk6-4, 3-6, 0-1
L#2 DoublesKristen Campbell / Kirsten Furry vs Ariana Goitz / Brianna Corder4-6, 5-7
2023-10-21vs OxfordSplit 11
W#1 DoublesMelissa Bailey / Heather Beasley vs Janelle Kotyk / Cherry Bharati6-4, 6-2
L#3 DoublesGina DeCola / Heather Hakos-Hruby vs Nathalie Sulli / Angelica Singh0-6, 0-6
2023-10-15vs PTAWon 21
W#1 DoublesKatie Rogers / Kara Ferner vs Kathy Radick / Cathy Chi6-3, 6-1
W#2 DoublesMiki Grim / Kirsten Furry vs Lauren Diulus / Deborah Brill6-3, 7-5
L#3 DoublesJennifer Fell / Lynn Langston vs Arla Baker / Virginia Molitor6-3, 2-6, 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 standings3 teams · 4.5 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Oxford5112614147
2PTA339922162
3Glen Creek1561225184

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 3.76 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.

Heather Beasley
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
4.20
Kirsten Rydstrom
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
4.16
Lori Baran
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
4.15
Linda van Roosmalen
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
4.04
Hiromi Katayama
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.99
Beth Sierka
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 4
3.92
Miki Grim
usually #1 Doubles 57%, also #2 Doubles 43% · published
3.90
Carla Babe
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.79
Lynn Langston
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published
3.79
Alicia Gorman
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 4
3.47
Jennifer Fell
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.39
Andrea Keck
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.36
Gina DeCola
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.33
Jody Frey
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
3.17
Heather Hakos-Hruby
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
Katie Rogers
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Kirsten Furry
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Kristen Campbell
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Sarah Hoffman
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.

Alicia Gorman + Lynn Langston9267% games+7.4% vs expected
Alicia Gorman + Beth Sierka321560% games+5.8% vs expected
Kirsten Rydstrom + Lori Baran7457% games+5.3% vs expected
Gina DeCola + Heather Hakos-Hruby9454% games+4.1% vs expected
Miki Grim + Beth Sierka21860% games+1.8% vs expected
Gina DeCola + Jody Frey7651% games−0.7% vs expected
Gina DeCola + Jennifer Fell4749% games−0.8% vs expected
Alicia Gorman + Miki Grim6455% games−2.1% vs expected
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
Heather Beasley
8W–9L career · 1 line in 2023
not enough data
Kirsten Rydstrom
28W–14L career · 1 line in 2023
6%93%1%
4.20
Lori Baran
23W–13L career · 1 line in 2023
10%89%<1%
4.16
Linda van Roosmalen
52W–41L career · 1 line in 2023
12%87%<1%
4.15
4
Hiromi Katayama
31W–27L career · 1 line in 2023
<1%39%61%
4.04
4
Beth Sierka
95W–57L career · 5 lines in 2023
<1%53%47%
3.99
Miki Grim
91W–51L career · 7 lines in 2023
<1%72%28%
3.92
4
Carla Babe
50W–50L career · 1 line in 2023
<1%77%23%
3.90
Lynn Langston
85W–47L career · 5 lines in 2023
1%93%6%
3.79
4
Alicia Gorman
104W–54L career · 5 lines in 2023
1%93%5%
3.79
Jennifer Fell
80W–63L career · 2 lines in 2023
<1%60%40%
3.47
3.5
Andrea Keck
81W–90L career · 2 lines in 2023
<1%80%20%
3.39
3.5
Gina DeCola
86W–87L career · 4 lines in 2023
<1%85%14%
3.36
Jody Frey
41W–65L career · 4 lines in 2023
90%10%<1%
3.33
3.5
Heather Hakos-Hruby
110W–109L career · 1 line in 2023
10%90%1%
3.17
Katie Rogers
33W–35L career · 1 line in 2023
not enough data
Kirsten Furry
77W–39L career · 2 lines in 2023
not enough data
Kristen Campbell
56W–21L career · 2 lines in 2023
not enough data
Sarah Hoffman
18W–38L 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.