Teams

Mystery 3.0W

2021 Adult 18 & Over · 3.0 Women

7 players · average NTRP 3.10 / ALASKA

View scouting list →
Schedule3 played
2021-05-16vs AK - A & ELost 04
L#1 DoublesPenny Rohacek / Cecilia Hopper vs Fledz Lastimoso / Rena Yancha4-6, 5-7
L#1 SinglesSong Bliss vs Michelle Trowbridge6-2, 1-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesNina Brudie / Barbara Jacobs vs Jennifer Duclos / Sherry Sedwick5-7, 2-6
L#3 DoublesKori Callison / Brook Connolly vs Dolores Alley / Emily Elison1-6, 2-6
2021-05-15vs AK - A & ELost 13
L#1 DoublesKori Callison / Brook Connolly vs Jennifer Duclos / Sherry Sedwick4-6, 2-6
L#1 SinglesPenny Rohacek vs Emily Elison2-6, 1-6
W#2 DoublesSong Bliss / Cecilia Hopper vs Dolores Alley / Rena Yancha7-5, 7-5
L#3 DoublesNina Brudie / Barbara Jacobs vs Allison Burand / Fledz Lastimoso2-6, 2-6
2021-05-14vs AK - A & ELost 03
L#1 DoublesSong Bliss / Barbara Jacobs vs Allison Burand / Dolores Alley4-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesJoaquita Martin / Cecilia Hopper vs Fledz Lastimoso / Rena Yancha0-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesBrook Connolly / Kori Callison vs Emily Elison / Michelle Trowbridge2-6, 5-7
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 2.85 estimated across 5 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.

3.22
Brook Connolly
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
2.89
Cecilia Hopper
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3
Barbara Jacobs
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.74
Song Bliss
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.73
Nina Brudie
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
2.67
Penny Rohacek
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3
Joaquita Martin
usually #2 Doubles 100% · 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.

Cecilia Hopper + Song Bliss3256% games+11.6% vs expected
Barbara Jacobs + Nina Brudie0634% games−8.7% vs expected
Barbara Jacobs + Song Bliss2640% gamesnot enough data
Song Bliss + Nina Brudie123 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
Brook Connolly
36W–22L career · type M · 3 lines in 2021
5%94%2%
3.22
3
Cecilia Hopper
42W–37L career · 3 lines in 2021
<1%79%21%
2.89
3
Barbara Jacobs
21W–47L career · 3 lines in 2021
not enough data
3
Song Bliss
63W–86L career · 3 lines in 2021
3%94%2%
2.74
Nina Brudie
8W–27L career · 2 lines in 2021
4%94%2%
2.73
3
Penny Rohacek
49W–47L career · 2 lines in 2021
9%90%1%
2.67
Joaquita Martin
3W–28L career · 1 line in 2021
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.