Teams

A4 ACAC Foley

2021 Richmond Combo Mixed · Combo Mixed 6.5

11 players · average NTRP 3.50 / VIRGINIA

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2021-11-06vs A5 Hermitage MugfordSplit 11
W#1 DoublesKim Smith / Jesse Smith vs Daniel Sadusky / Stephanie Yablonski6-2, 2-1
L#2 DoublesElizabeth Coleman / Dave Booth vs Sarah Martin / Will Martin5-7, 6-4, 0-1
2021-10-24vs A7 TCRC AsherWon 10
W#1 DoublesJesse Smith / Kim Smith vs Charlie Chien Le / Cam Nguyen6-1, 6-2
2021-10-23vs A1 Avalon Ghita 6.5Split 11
W#1 DoublesJesse Smith / Kim Smith vs Richard Bland / Faith Kallman6-0, 6-3
L#2 DoublesElizabeth Coleman / Mark Lutterbie vs Monica Ghita / Brad Williamson7-5, 2-6, 0-1
2021-10-16vs A8 WOCC Hinchcliffe/HaasWon 10
W#3 DoublesJennifer Booth / Bert Teachey vs Colette Christianson / Charles Christianson6-3, 6-2
2021-10-01vs A2 Westwood West/CosbyWon 10
W#1 DoublesJesse Smith / Kim Smith vs Josh Reynal / Christine Holt7-5, 6-1
2021-09-18vs A9 MTC McElgunn/CutlipWon 10
W#3 DoublesDave Booth / Elizabeth Coleman vs Peggy McElgunn / Mark Winslow6-1, 6-1
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 standings for Combo Mixed 6.5 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 3.22 estimated across 10 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.

3.87
Miguel Romero
published
3.72
Bert Teachey
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.51
Jesse Smith
usually #1 Doubles 83%, also #2 Doubles 17% · published 4
3.34
Yasmin Lutterbie
published
3.21
Elizabeth Coleman
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.11
Erika King
published 3.5
2.94
Amy Romero
published 3
2.89
Mark Lutterbie
published
2.83
Dave Booth
published 3
2.82
Mari Litz
published
William Fields
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.

Miguel Romero + Amy Romero314 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.

Miguel Romero
29W–32L career · no lines in 2021
<1%85%15%
3.87
4
Bert Teachey
119W–144L career · 3 lines in 2021
5%94%2%
3.72
4
Jesse Smith
166W–117L career · 6 lines in 2021
48%52%<1%
3.51
Yasmin Lutterbie
8W–7L career · no lines in 2021
<1%89%11%
3.34
3.5
Elizabeth Coleman
172W–119L career · 3 lines in 2021
5%94%1%
3.21
3.5
Erika King
8W–8L career · no lines in 2021
19%81%<1%
3.11
3
Amy Romero
21W–23L career · no lines in 2021
<1%67%33%
2.94
Mark Lutterbie
4W–14L career · no lines in 2021
79%21%<1%
2.89
3
Dave Booth
19W–20L career · no lines in 2021
1%90%9%
2.83
Mari Litz
8W–11L career · no lines in 2021
1%91%9%
2.82
William Fields
2W–5L career · no lines 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.