Teams

Rath

2026 Iowa Tri-Level League · 3.5-4.0-4.5 Women (East)

15 players · average NTRP 3.71 / IOWA

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2026-07-29vs DiLeoLost 01
L#1 DoublesMichelle Novak / Alisa Steele vs Kay Dileo / Michele Conlon1-6, 3-6
2026-07-15vs LinkWon 10
W#1 DoublesAlisa Steele / Maleah Hampton vs Elizabeth Wright / Lulu Rozeboom6-1, 6-3
2026-07-08vs DiLeoLost 01
L#1 DoublesHillary Johnson-Jahangir / Alisa Steele vs Kay Dileo / Sara Loetscher1-6, 3-6
2026-06-24Won 10
W#1 DoublesSophia Fain / Kathryn Fain vs Elizabeth Wright / Avery Link7-6, 7-5
2026-06-17Lost 01
L#1 DoublesGreta Rath / Alisa Steele vs Elizabeth Wright / Avery Link6-7, 4-6
2026-06-03vs DiLeoLost 01
L#1 DoublesKathryn Fain / Sophia Fain vs Kay Dileo / Michele Conlon4-6, 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 standings2 teams · 3.5-4.0-4.5 Women (East)
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Rath5112614121
2Brown/Andrews1561228188

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 3.35 estimated across 12 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.

4.17
Alisa Steele
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
3.70
Anna Siddall
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.60
Greta Rath
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.55
Jennifer Kemmerer
usually #2 Doubles 57%, also #3 Doubles 43% · published
3.48
Hillary Johnson-Jahangir
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.44
Michelle Novak
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.31
JENNIFER HEBERT
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.22
Kirby Dreher
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.12
Maleah Hampton
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published
2.93
Blair Gordon
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.89
Erin Langdon
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.81
Kristi Whitham
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Kathryn Fain
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Sophia Fain
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Tiffany Williams
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.

JENNIFER HEBERT + Michelle Novak4160% games+13.2% vs expected
Jennifer Kemmerer + Michelle Novak10557% games+12.0% vs expected
Jennifer Kemmerer + JENNIFER HEBERT4159% games+10.5% vs expected
Michelle Novak + Hillary Johnson-Jahangir1641% games+0.9% vs expected
Erin Langdon + JENNIFER HEBERT213 matchesnot enough data
Erin Langdon + Kristi Whitham213 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.

4.5
Alisa Steele
28W–22L career · 4 lines in 2026
9%90%1%
4.17
4
Anna Siddall
6W–7L career · 3 lines in 2026
6%93%1%
3.70
4
Greta Rath
139W–93L career · 2 lines in 2026
23%77%<1%
3.60
Jennifer Kemmerer
60W–24L career · 7 lines in 2026
<1%34%66%
3.55
4
Hillary Johnson-Jahangir
36W–37L career · 6 lines in 2026
57%43%<1%
3.48
Michelle Novak
72W–40L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%69%31%
3.44
3.5
JENNIFER HEBERT
43W–32L career · 6 lines in 2026
1%91%8%
3.31
Kirby Dreher
12W–6L career · 2 lines in 2026
4%94%2%
3.22
Maleah Hampton
7W–13L career · 5 lines in 2026
<1%17%83%
3.12
3
Blair Gordon
9W–2L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%70%30%
2.93
3
Erin Langdon
31W–18L career · 5 lines in 2026
<1%79%21%
2.89
Kristi Whitham
15W–24L career · 5 lines in 2026
1%92%7%
2.81
Kathryn Fain
1W–1L career · 2 lines in 2026
not enough data
Sophia Fain
4W–3L career · 2 lines in 2026
not enough data
Tiffany Williams
3W–2L 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.