Teams

Ju.Kim18A

2024 Capital Adult 18 & Over · 4.0 Women

11 players · average NTRP 3.81 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule10 played
2024-05-09vs Sh.Powell18ASplit 11
L#1 DoublesDana Rawls / Molly Briggs vs Lisa ONeill / Dolores Quesenberry4-6, 4-6
W#3 DoublesKaren Ice / Allison DeMacy vs Laura Dwyer / Ginger Sluder6-2, 7-6
2024-05-02vs Ad.Brewer18ASplit 11
L#1 DoublesDana Rawls / Allison DeMacy vs Elisabeth Sanchez / Amanda Williams2-6, 3-6
W#3 DoublesDana Chapman / Heidi Duggins vs Rebecca Bennett / Mary Dee Smith2-6, 7-5, 1-0
2024-04-25vs Al.Crumpler18ASplit 22
W#1 DoublesMolly Briggs / Dana Rawls vs Amy Pena / Sharon Baggett6-1, 3-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesAdrienne Padilla / Dana Chapman vs Allison Crumpler / Kristi Koren1-6, 4-6
L#2 SinglesEmily Uhland vs Anne Free0-6, 0-6
W#3 DoublesChristine Hunt / Allison DeMacy vs Kate Whitney / LeAnne Bloedon6-1, 6-4
2024-04-18vs Ch.Team18AWon 30
W#1 DoublesMolly Briggs / Jaime Szymusiak vs Lynda McDonell / Karen Conley6-2, 6-3
W#2 DoublesDana Chapman / Adrienne Padilla vs Christy Team / Kellie Chesson3-6, 6-2, 1-0
W#2 SinglesHeidi Duggins vs Beth Rives7-5, 7-5
2024-04-11vs Ta.Gonzalez-Borsuk18ASplit 22
L#1 DoublesMolly Briggs / Dana Chapman vs Jenny Nguyen / Gillian Sellick4-6, 3-6
W#2 DoublesKaren Ice / Dana Rawls vs N/A6-0, 6-0
L#2 SinglesHeidi Duggins vs Susan Hill0-6, 1-6
W#3 DoublesChristine Hunt / Allison DeMacy vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2024-04-10vs Le.Ragsdale18ALost 03
L#1 DoublesJaime Szymusiak / Carlie McLeod vs Hilary Kuss / Cynthia Smith4-6, 1-6
L#2 SinglesEmily Uhland vs Carrie Vander Vennet4-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesAnnette Page / Karen Ice vs Kim von Weihe / Kathryn Gerber3-6, 1-6
2024-03-21vs Me.Liner/Lake18ALost 04
L#1 DoublesKaren Ice / Molly Briggs vs Jennifer Bricker / Leigh Kimball2-6, 0-6
L#1 SinglesEmily Uhland vs Nancy Gugliotta3-6, 6-1, 0-1
L#2 DoublesDana Chapman / Maggie Patterson vs Joyce Lake / Alexis Johnson3-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesAdrienne Padilla / Allison DeMacy vs Susan Shaw / Kathryn Beth Beam6-7, 6-3, 0-1
2024-03-19vs Ka.Brinckerhoff18ALost 01
L#1 DoublesMolly Briggs / Allison DeMacy vs Erin Conigliaro / Jane Limkakeng6-1, 4-6, 0-1
2024-03-14vs De.Skiko18ALost 03
L#1 DoublesMolly Briggs / Dana Rawls vs Keri Allen / Ann Bowler6-4, 3-6, 0-1
L#1 SinglesEmily Uhland vs Kristen Wassel2-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesAllison DeMacy / Karen Ice vs Mary Jo Nugent / Deb Skiko7-5, 2-6, 0-1
2024-02-29vs Su.Fanelly18ALost 13
L#1 DoublesAnnette Page / Karen Ice vs Kristal Nelson / Mary Money5-7, 2-6
L#2 DoublesDana Rawls / Molly Briggs vs Suellen Bailey / Jeanmarie Warren4-6, 4-6
L#2 SinglesHeidi Duggins vs Connie Peterson1-6, 0-6
W#3 DoublesMaggie Patterson / Jaime Szymusiak vs Kimberly Patrey / Dana Weiland5-5
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 4.0 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 3.58 estimated across 11 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.

3.91
Molly Briggs
published
3.79
Julia Kim
published
3.73
Allison DeMacy
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published 4
3.68
Annette Page
published 4
3.64
Jaime Szymusiak
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.60
Karen Ice
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.57
Emily Uhland
usually #1 Singles 78%, also #2 Singles 22% · published 3.5
3.56
Maggie Patterson
published
3.53
Dana Rawls
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.31
Dana Chapman
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #1 Doubles 20% · published 3.5
3.10
Heidi Duggins
usually #2 Singles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
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.

Karen Ice + Allison DeMacy211552% games+0.9% vs expected
Dana Rawls + Allison DeMacy3744% games−3.0% vs expected
Karen Ice + Dana Rawls5653% gamesnot enough data
Heidi Duggins + Dana Chapman5058% gamesnot enough data
Annette Page + Molly Briggs404 matchesnot enough data
Annette Page + Allison DeMacy213 matchesnot enough data
Molly Briggs + Dana Rawls303 matchesnot enough data
Emily Uhland + Maggie Patterson213 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.

Molly Briggs
34W–18L career · no lines in 2024
<1%75%25%
3.91
Julia Kim
4W–5L career · no lines in 2024
94%6%<1%
3.79
4
Allison DeMacy
272W–119L career · 10 lines in 2024
4%94%2%
3.73
4
Annette Page
19W–14L career · no lines in 2024
8%91%1%
3.68
4
Jaime Szymusiak
32W–25L career · 3 lines in 2024
14%85%<1%
3.64
4
Karen Ice
101W–74L career · 6 lines in 2024
22%78%<1%
3.60
3.5
Emily Uhland
87W–71L career · 9 lines in 2024
<1%30%70%
3.57
Maggie Patterson
6W–9L career · no lines in 2024
31%69%<1%
3.56
4
Dana Rawls
129W–111L career · 6 lines in 2024
42%58%<1%
3.53
3.5
Dana Chapman
57W–66L career · 5 lines in 2024
1%92%7%
3.31
3.5
Heidi Duggins
95W–121L career · 4 lines in 2024
23%77%<1%
3.10

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.