Teams

CSU GREEN

2023 TRIO - NOCO · WOMEN 3.5 - TRIO - NOCO

9 players · average NTRP 3.67 / COLORADO

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 →
Schedule4 played
2023-04-22vs HMTCWon 20
W#1 DoublesTracy Hutton / Layne Martin vs Kristen Frisch / Wendy Ball6-0, 6-2
W#2 DoublesErin Dirvonas / Brittney Stephenson vs Teresa Adsit / Stacey Fox6-1, 7-5
2023-04-15vs FCCCWon 20
W#1 DoublesJill Brooks / Layne Martin vs June Ellen Feil / Lisa Clay7-6, 6-7, 1-0
W#1 SinglesAlison Earnhart vs Hilary McCart2-6, 7-6, 1-0
2023-04-08vs CSU GOLDLost 02
L#1 DoublesTracy Hutton / Layne Martin vs Karen Preiss / Stephanie Kemp0-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesErin Dirvonas / Karen Trevino vs Tahni Clay / Pat Murphy-Ebersole6-4, 1-6, 0-1
2023-04-01vs TAGSplit 11
W#1 DoublesTracy Hutton / Alison Earnhart vs Annette Nueske / Lisa Novacek6-2, 6-2
L#2 DoublesBrittney Stephenson / Karen Trevino vs Amber Slade / Arwen Christian2-6, 2-6
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 standings for WOMEN 3.5 - TRIO - NOCO 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 3.41 estimated across 9 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.

3.73
Brittney Stephenson
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.71
Alison Earnhart
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #1 Singles 50% · published 4
3.60
Jill Brooks
published
3.38
Layne Martin
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.37
Tracy Hutton
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.27
Karen Trevino
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.26
Paige Kanatous
published
3.21
Erin Dirvonas
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.19
Marie Massey
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.

Alison Earnhart + Brittney Stephenson19757% games+7.8% vs expected
Karen Trevino + Tracy Hutton5250% games−6.4% vs expected
Erin Dirvonas + Tracy Hutton5159% gamesnot enough data
Tracy Hutton + Layne Martin4259% gamesnot enough data
Tracy Hutton + Brittney Stephenson5064% gamesnot enough data
Erin Dirvonas + Brittney Stephenson314 matchesnot enough data
Paige Kanatous + Karen Trevino303 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
Brittney Stephenson
61W–33L career · 2 lines in 2023
5%92%3%
3.73
4
Alison Earnhart
71W–48L career · 2 lines in 2023
7%91%2%
3.71
Jill Brooks
34W–17L career · no lines in 2023
<1%<1%>99%
3.60
3.5
Layne Martin
36W–18L career · 3 lines in 2023
<1%80%20%
3.38
3.5
Tracy Hutton
71W–37L career · 3 lines in 2023
<1%82%17%
3.37
3.5
Karen Trevino
62W–50L career · 2 lines in 2023
3%92%5%
3.27
Paige Kanatous
15W–6L career · no lines in 2023
3%92%5%
3.26
3.5
Erin Dirvonas
114W–82L career · 2 lines in 2023
7%91%2%
3.21
Marie Massey
11W–13L career · no lines in 2023
8%90%1%
3.19

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.