Teams

QRRC Oakley

2024 OH OV FALL A18&O Daytime · 3.0W Tuesday

12 players · average NTRP 3.00 / OHIO VALLEY

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 →
Schedule7 played
2023-12-12vs QRRC BrooksSplit 11
L#1 DoublesElizabeth Oakley / Jacqueline Harris vs Mary Walblay / Susan Holm3-6, 6-7
W#2 DoublesSam Linhardt / Kerri Tullis vs Mary Welfle / Starlene Brooks4-6, 7-6, 1-0
2023-11-28vs QRRC BrooksLost 02
L#1 DoublesMichelle Lewis / Ailing Weng vs Mary Welfle / Sarah Richards0-6, 0-6
L#2 DoublesElizabeth Oakley / Sheri Hayes vs Sydney Corbean / Daphne Warner7-5, 3-6, 0-1
2023-10-31vs QRRC BrooksWon 10
W#2 DoublesMichelle Lewis / Sam Linhardt vs Starlene Brooks / Cynthia Williamson6-3, 6-3
2023-10-17vs QRRC BrooksSplit 11
L#1 SinglesAllison Swanson vs Sydney Corbean6-7, 3-5
W#2 DoublesElizabeth Oakley / Jacqueline Harris vs Mary Walblay / Cynthia Williamson6-2, 6-3
2023-10-03vs QRRC BrooksWon 21
W#1 DoublesAiling Weng / Joanne Reiling vs Mary Welfle / Laura Darden7-5, 2-5, 1-0
L#1 SinglesAllison Swanson vs Sydney Corbean3-6, 4-6
W#2 DoublesElizabeth Oakley / Stephanie Smith vs Mary Walblay / Laura Horn4-6, 6-2, 1-0
2023-09-19vs QRRC BrooksSplit 11
L#1 SinglesAllison Swanson vs Mary Welfle4-6, 2-6
W#2 DoublesAiling Weng / Joanne Reiling vs Susan Holm / Hilary Smith6-3, 6-2
2023-09-12vs QRRC BrooksSplit 11
L#1 SinglesAllison Swanson vs Zina Williams1-6, 4-6
W#2 DoublesElizabeth Oakley / Jacqueline Harris vs Mary Walblay / Starlene Brooks6-1, 6-3
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 standings2 teams · 3.0W Tuesday
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1QRRC Oakley7116819174
2QRRC Brooks1781633237

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 2.97 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.

3.38
Elizabeth Oakley
usually #2 Doubles 80%, also #1 Doubles 20% · published
3.33
Megan Oue
usually #3 Doubles 38%, also #1 Doubles 38% · published
2.98
Sam Linhardt
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Allison Swanson
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 3
2.69
Sheri Hayes
usually #2 Doubles 25%, also #4 Doubles 25% · published
2.45
Ailing Weng
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3
Emily Hudson
published
Jacqueline Harris
published
Joanne Reiling
usually #4 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
Kerri Tullis
usually #2 Doubles 29%, also #1 Singles 29% · published
Michelle Lewis
published
Terri Stark
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.

Sheri Hayes + Kerri Tullis18956% games+5.2% vs expected
Emily Hudson + Megan Oue7262% games+1.8% vs expected
Sam Linhardt + Sheri Hayes6251% games−4.4% vs expected
Ailing Weng + Michelle Lewis2543% games−6.7% vs expected
Sam Linhardt + Kerri Tullis2442% gamesnot enough data
Joanne Reiling + Ailing Weng314 matchesnot enough data
Jacqueline Harris + Sheri Hayes213 matchesnot enough data
Sam Linhardt + Elizabeth Oakley213 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.

Elizabeth Oakley
72W–33L career · 5 lines in 2024
<1%79%20%
3.38
Megan Oue
95W–85L career · 8 lines in 2024
1%87%12%
3.33
Sam Linhardt
119W–105L career · 2 lines in 2024
<1%56%44%
2.98
3
Allison Swanson
46W–37L career · 4 lines in 2024
not enough data
Sheri Hayes
75W–62L career · 4 lines in 2024
9%89%1%
2.69
3
Ailing Weng
19W–48L career · 3 lines in 2024
64%36%<1%
2.45
Emily Hudson
37W–19L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Jacqueline Harris
11W–14L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Joanne Reiling
8W–11L career · 4 lines in 2024
not enough data
Kerri Tullis
60W–65L career · 6 lines in 2024
not enough data
Michelle Lewis
34W–36L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Terri Stark
6W–9L career · no 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.