Teams

Fear The Forehand

Tri-Level League · Tri-Level 4.0, 3.5, 3.0 Women Central

18 players · average NTRP 3.67 / NEW JERSEY

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 →
Flight standings2 teams · Tri-Level 4.0, 3.5, 3.0 Women Central
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Triple The Trouble000000
2Fear The Forehand000000

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 3.43 estimated across 17 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.

3.88
Jamie Wasserman
published
3.85
Vanessa Nied
published 4
3.83
Michelle Kang
published
3.80
3.77
Alison North
published 3.5
3.75
Betsy Veysman
published 4
3.65
JUHEE LEE
published
3.55
Valerie Tchikanda
published
3.48
Sherla Glasgow
published 3.5
3.35
Lori Bennett
published
3.30
Tina Gonzalez
published
3.15
Elizabeth McCulloch
published
3.04
Maria Velazquez
published
3.01
Jennifer Hughes
published
3.01
Lynne Ainge
published 3
3.00
Jessie Shaffer
published
2.90
Jennifer Bautista
published
Lauren Park
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.

Sherla Glasgow + Michelle Kang14165% games+12.4% vs expected
Jamie Wasserman + Betsy Veysman431860% games+9.5% vs expected
Maria Velazquez + Jennifer Hughes19856% games+7.8% vs expected
Jamie Wasserman + Lori Bennett11555% games+7.0% vs expected
Tina Gonzalez + Vanessa Nied5457% games+5.8% vs expected
Tina Gonzalez + Sherla Glasgow2338% games+4.9% vs expected
Michelle Kang + JUHEE LEE663755% games+4.3% vs expected
Valerie Tchikanda + Sherla Glasgow121151% games+2.7% 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.

Jamie Wasserman
149W–97L career · no lines in 2026
<1%79%20%
3.88
4
Vanessa Nied
141W–49L career · no lines in 2026
1%85%14%
3.85
Michelle Kang
179W–118L career · no lines in 2026
1%87%12%
3.83
4
Christine Ferrara
91W–61L career · no lines in 2026
2%91%7%
3.80
3.5
Alison North
184W–37L career · no lines in 2026
<1%3%97%
3.77
4
Betsy Veysman
93W–46L career · no lines in 2026
3%93%4%
3.75
JUHEE LEE
151W–107L career · no lines in 2026
14%86%1%
3.65
Valerie Tchikanda
121W–103L career · no lines in 2026
37%63%<1%
3.55
3.5
Sherla Glasgow
240W–165L career · no lines in 2026
<1%55%45%
3.48
Lori Bennett
90W–135L career · no lines in 2026
1%85%15%
3.35
Tina Gonzalez
171W–134L career · no lines in 2026
2%91%8%
3.30
Elizabeth McCulloch
22W–11L career · no lines in 2026
<1%15%85%
3.15
Maria Velazquez
43W–41L career · no lines in 2026
<1%39%61%
3.04
Jennifer Hughes
47W–20L career · no lines in 2026
<1%46%54%
3.01
3
Lynne Ainge
112W–86L career · no lines in 2026
<1%47%53%
3.01
Jessie Shaffer
41W–30L career · no lines in 2026
<1%51%49%
3.00
Jennifer Bautista
47W–32L career · no lines in 2026
<1%77%23%
2.90
Lauren Park
103W–28L career · no lines in 2026
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.