Teams

LRedmond

2022 Capital Summer 18 & Over Tri-Level · 3.0

9 players · average NTRP 3.67 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule7 played
2022-07-30Won 20
W#1 DoublesMadison Paul / Meryl Golder vs Carol Hedley / Jill David6-4, 6-4
W#2 DoublesLiz Arcos / Marina Barthalmus vs Lauren King / Sandhya Gopal4-6, 7-6, 1-0
2022-07-23Won 10
W#2 DoublesMeryl Golder / Ashley Warren vs Carol Hedley / Jill David6-3, 6-4
2022-07-16Won 10
W#3 DoublesAmy Gillespie / Liz Arcos vs Heather Mills / Heather Mordecai6-4, 7-6
2022-07-09Won 10
W#1 DoublesKana Brinckerhoff / Meryl Golder vs Carrie Rice / Jamie Martin6-1, 6-3
2022-06-25vs RiceSplit 11
W#1 DoublesGwynn Thayer / Kana Brinckerhoff vs Carrie Rice / Carol Hedley6-3, 6-0
L#2 DoublesMarina Barthalmus / Liz Arcos vs Jill David / Angela Coolidge6-3, 0-6, 0-1
2022-06-18Lost 01
L#2 DoublesLiz Arcos / Mallory Altneu vs Carrie Rice / Lauren King2-6, 2-6
2022-06-11Won 20
W#1 DoublesGwynn Thayer / Kana Brinckerhoff vs Lisa ONeill / Jamie Martin5-7, 7-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesAmy Gillespie / Liz Arcos vs Jessica Brock / Sandhya Gopal6-3, 7-5
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 3.0 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 3.50 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.

4.06
Meryl Golder
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.93
Kana Brinckerhoff
usually #1 Doubles 63%, also #2 Doubles 38% · published 4
3.70
Stephanie Whiting
published
3.52
Madison Paul
published
3.40
Gwynn Thayer
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.32
Marina Barthalmus
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
3.31
Liz Arcos
usually #2 Doubles 80%, also #3 Doubles 20% · published 3.5
3.26
Lauren Redmond
published
3.00
Abigail Weaver
published 3
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.

Meryl Golder + Gwynn Thayer12652% games+3.0% vs expected
Gwynn Thayer + Marina Barthalmus3549% gamesnot enough data
Kana Brinckerhoff + Gwynn Thayer3257% gamesnot enough data
Marina Barthalmus + Liz Arcos3253% gamesnot enough data
Lauren Redmond + Abigail Weaver033 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
Meryl Golder
141W–76L career · 3 lines in 2022
<1%33%67%
4.06
4
Kana Brinckerhoff
238W–110L career · 8 lines in 2022
<1%69%31%
3.93
Stephanie Whiting
2W–2L career · no lines in 2022
6%93%1%
3.70
Madison Paul
11W–30L career · no lines in 2022
43%57%<1%
3.52
4
Gwynn Thayer
135W–108L career · 2 lines in 2022
77%23%<1%
3.40
3.5
Marina Barthalmus
218W–213L career · 5 lines in 2022
1%91%8%
3.32
3.5
Liz Arcos
193W–124L career · 5 lines in 2022
1%92%7%
3.31
Lauren Redmond
31W–20L career · no lines in 2022
2%94%3%
3.26
3
Abigail Weaver
18W–30L career · no lines in 2022
<1%52%48%
3.00

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.