Teams

UPTA39/Sastry/GCC

2022 Fall 39 & over-Women-UPTA · 3.5 Women

20 players · average NTRP 3.50 / SOUTH CAROLINA

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 standings for 3.5 Women 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 3.26 estimated across 14 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.

3.41
M Christine von Wyl
published
3.41
Carissa Ivey
published 3.5
3.40
Anna Cheves
published 3.5
3.35
Amanda Arscott
published 3.5
3.35
Catherine Dugas
published 3.5
3.34
Diana Tiller
published 3.5
3.29
Natalie Brown
published
3.26
Ginny Pazdan
published 3.5
Amanda Sanders
published 3.5
Elizabeth Hendrix
published 3.5
3.24
Tracy O'Shea
published
3.21
Salli Alexander
published
3.21
Lisa Mann
published
3.15
Whitney Collins
published
3.10
Alicia Sastry
published 3.5
2.90
Ann Ellison
published 3.5
Lorye Boukedes
published
Melissa Thomason
published
Michelle York
published
Rae Gillespie
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.

Carissa Ivey + Diana Tiller4256% games+7.6% vs expected
Tracy O'Shea + Natalie Brown5247% games+3.5% vs expected
Salli Alexander + Catherine Dugas134 matchesnot enough data
Ginny Pazdan + Lisa Mann134 matchesnot enough data
Tracy O'Shea + M Christine von Wyl314 matchesnot enough data
Ginny Pazdan + Whitney Collins213 matchesnot enough data
Amanda Arscott + M Christine von Wyl303 matchesnot enough data
Rae Gillespie + Catherine Dugas213 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.

M Christine von Wyl
23W–11L career · no lines in 2022
<1%75%25%
3.41
3.5
Carissa Ivey
8W–3L career · no lines in 2022
<1%76%24%
3.41
3.5
Anna Cheves
5W–1L career · type M · no lines in 2022
<1%77%23%
3.40
3.5
Amanda Arscott
10W–0L career · no lines in 2022
<1%87%13%
3.35
3.5
Catherine Dugas
16W–13L career · no lines in 2022
<1%87%13%
3.35
3.5
Diana Tiller
9W–7L career · no lines in 2022
<1%89%10%
3.34
Natalie Brown
10W–7L career · no lines in 2022
1%93%6%
3.29
3.5
Ginny Pazdan
9W–8L career · no lines in 2022
2%94%3%
3.26
3.5
Amanda Sanders
3W–1L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
3.5
Elizabeth Hendrix
0W–3L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Tracy O'Shea
38W–27L career · no lines in 2022
3%95%2%
3.24
Salli Alexander
18W–18L career · no lines in 2022
5%94%1%
3.21
Lisa Mann
8W–8L career · no lines in 2022
6%93%1%
3.21
Whitney Collins
9W–5L career · no lines in 2022
13%87%<1%
3.15
3.5
Alicia Sastry
8W–7L career · no lines in 2022
23%77%<1%
3.10
3.5
Ann Ellison
19W–29L career · no lines in 2022
77%23%<1%
2.90
Lorye Boukedes
2W–2L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Melissa Thomason
4W–4L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Michelle York
1W–0L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Rae Gillespie
4W–6L 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.