Teams

WI Low Tri W Fall Singles MALT Schopp

2026 WI Other · WI Low Tri Fall Singles Women

4 players · average NTRP 3.25 / WISCONSIN

View scouting list →
Flight standings4 teams · WI Low Tri Fall Singles Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1WI Low Tri W Fall Singles MALT Mavlyutov1030118
2WI Low Tri W Fall Singles MALT Palreddy000000
3WI Low Tri W Fall Singles MALT Schopp000000
4WI Low Tri W Fall Singles MALT Wegner0103634

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 2.73 estimated across 3 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.

3.18
Anne Yates
published 3.5
2.89
Amy Bishop
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #3 Singles 25% · published 3
2.11
Maggie Brickerman
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
MacAyla Schopp
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
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
Anne Yates
8W–10L career · type S · no lines in 2026
9%89%1%
3.18
3
Amy Bishop
52W–81L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%77%22%
2.89
Maggie Brickerman
4W–18L career · 1 line in 2026
0%>99%<1%
2.11
MacAyla Schopp
12W–42L career · 1 line 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.