Teams

Kr.Esham18S

2025 Capital Fall Singles 18 & Over · 3.0 Women

7 players · average NTRP 3.10 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2025-10-31vs Sa.Highsmith18SSplit 11
L#2 SinglesAbigail Douek vs Sally Highsmith4-6, 3-6
W#3 SinglesKristin Esham vs Kristen Patch6-2, 6-3
2025-10-21Won 20
W#1 SinglesKristin Esham vs N/A6-0, 6-0
W#3 SinglesAbigail Douek vs Emily Boyer6-2, 6-0
2025-10-07vs Ki.Meeker18SWon 20
W#1 SinglesKari Knoblauch vs Kimberlie Meeker6-1, 3-6, 1-0
W#2 SinglesMary Zimardo vs Sarah Herring6-0, 6-0
2025-10-01vs Sa.Highsmith18SLost 02
L#1 SinglesAbigail Douek vs Caroline Smith3-6, 6-7
L#2 SinglesMeghan Richardson vs Sally Highsmith2-6, 1-6
2025-09-16vs Ki.Meeker18SWon 30
W#1 SinglesMary Zimardo vs Kimberlie Meeker6-3, 6-3
W#2 SinglesKari Knoblauch vs Sarah Herring6-2, 6-1
W#3 SinglesKristin Esham vs Natalie Mayur6-2, 6-0
2025-09-02vs Sa.Highsmith18SLost 01
L#1 SinglesAbigail Douek vs Ferebee Plyler5-7, 1-6
2025-08-26vs Ki.Meeker18SLost 01
L#1 SinglesKristin Esham vs Kimberlie Meeker5-7, 3-6
2025-08-12vs Sa.Highsmith18SLost 02
L#1 SinglesMary Zimardo vs Ferebee Plyler6-2, 5-7, 0-1
L#2 SinglesMeghan Richardson vs Caroline Smith4-6, 3-6
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 2.99 estimated across 7 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.

3.51
Mary Zimardo
usually #1 Singles 67%, also #2 Singles 33% · published 3.5
3.12
Abigail Douek
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #3 Singles 25% · published 3
3.06
Kari Knoblauch
usually #2 Singles 50%, also #1 Singles 50% · published 3
3.04
Meghan Richardson
usually #2 Singles 100% · published 3
2.99
Kristin Esham
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #3 Singles 50% · published 3
2.60
Marlet Edwards
published
2.59
Melanie Gill
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.

Kari Knoblauch + Mary Zimardo5264% gamesnot enough data
Kristin Esham + Abigail Douek213 matchesnot enough data
Kristin Esham + Mary Zimardo303 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 Zimardo
114W–35L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%47%53%
3.51
3
Abigail Douek
80W–38L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%19%81%
3.12
3
Kari Knoblauch
113W–69L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%33%67%
3.06
3
Meghan Richardson
41W–30L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%40%60%
3.04
3
Kristin Esham
89W–69L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%54%46%
2.99
Marlet Edwards
0W–6L career · no lines in 2025
23%77%<1%
2.60
Melanie Gill
1W–2L career · no lines in 2025
26%73%<1%
2.59

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.