Teams

LManweiler 3.5/4/4.5

2022 Capital Summer 18 & Over Tri-Level · 3.5

11 players · average NTRP 3.80 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2022-08-05Won 10
W#3 DoublesJulia Kim / Dana Rawls vs Susanne Knowles / Melissa George6-0, 6-4
2022-07-29vs CBASONSplit 11
L#2 DoublesMolly Briggs / Sandra Merkel DeJames vs Celeste Ramsey / Jane Limkakeng1-6, 1-6
W#3 DoublesJulia Kim / Dana Rawls vs Shelia Knoll / Kimberly Walker6-3, 6-2
2022-07-22vs APenaLost 01
L#3 DoublesMindy Ladd / Dana Rawls vs Adrienne Brewer / Heather Brewer3-6, 5-7
2022-07-15vs JFoglemanLost 01
L#3 DoublesDana Rawls / Danielle Stringer vs Wendy Burkard / Betsy Wood-Ehrenberger0-6, 7-6, 0-1
2022-07-01Won 10
W#3 DoublesJulia Kim / Dana Rawls vs Jamie Martin / Ann Willard6-1, 6-0
2022-06-24vs CBASONSplit 11
L#2 DoublesLynne Manweiler / Sandra Merkel DeJames vs Kimberly Walker / Jane Limkakeng0-6, 1-6
W#3 DoublesDana Rawls / Adrienne Padilla vs Sherrie Lefere / Jane Hunter6-4, 7-6
2022-06-17Won 10
W#2 DoublesMolly Briggs / Sandra Merkel DeJames vs Brooke Somers / LeAnne Bloedon6-2, 6-1
2022-06-10vs JFoglemanWon 10
W#3 DoublesJulia Kim / Dana Rawls vs Jennifer Fogleman / Wendy Burkard6-2, 6-4
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 3.5 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 3.66 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.

4.13
Kimberly Boyd
published
3.91
Molly Briggs
published
3.87
Olga DeGroff
published
3.79
Julia Kim
published
3.73
Karen McKee
published
3.53
Dana Rawls
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.50
Lynne Manweiler
usually #1 Doubles 63%, also #2 Doubles 38% · published 4
3.46
Sandra Merkel DeJames
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.35
Maggie LaPlante
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.32
Danielle Stringer
published 3.5
Michelle Vedder
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.

Sandra Merkel DeJames + Lynne Manweiler4943% gamesnot enough data
Molly Briggs + Dana Rawls303 matchesnot enough data
Maggie LaPlante + Danielle Stringer033 matchesnot enough data
Maggie LaPlante + Lynne Manweiler213 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.

Kimberly Boyd
1W–3L career · no lines in 2022
16%84%<1%
4.13
Molly Briggs
34W–18L career · no lines in 2022
<1%75%25%
3.91
Olga DeGroff
6W–5L career · no lines in 2022
<1%84%15%
3.87
Julia Kim
4W–5L career · no lines in 2022
94%6%<1%
3.79
Karen McKee
7W–6L career · no lines in 2022
4%94%2%
3.73
4
Dana Rawls
129W–111L career · 7 lines in 2022
42%58%<1%
3.53
4
Lynne Manweiler
90W–125L career · 8 lines in 2022
51%49%<1%
3.50
4
Sandra Merkel DeJames
51W–47L career · 3 lines in 2022
61%39%<1%
3.46
3.5
Maggie LaPlante
95W–120L career · 4 lines in 2022
<1%87%12%
3.35
3.5
Danielle Stringer
8W–10L career · no lines in 2022
1%91%8%
3.32
Michelle Vedder
1W–0L career · no lines in 2022
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.