Teams

Reefe - Tri-ing for Sally

2024 Frederick Tri-Level 18 & Over · Frederick Tri-Level 3.5, 3.0, 2.5 Women

15 players · average NTRP 3.10 / MARYLAND

View scouting list →
Schedule10 played
2024-10-18vs Dickerson 2.5-3.5Split 11
L#2 DoublesGail Shenk / Kristy Sullivan vs Faye Meyers / Miki Reed1-6, 2-6
W#3 DoublesWhitney Petrie / Jillian Zoltek vs Taylor Clark / Erica Murray3-6, 6-1, 1-0
2024-10-10vs Dickerson 2.5-3.5Split 11
W#2 DoublesGail Shenk / Michelle Shipley vs Robin Dickerson / Faye Meyers4-6, 6-1, 1-0
L#3 DoublesJillian Zoltek / Amanda Britton vs Carol Bernard / Alanna Volatile6-7, 5-7
2024-10-03vs Hawk - Serving it up for SallySplit 11
L#2 DoublesGail Shenk / Kristy Sullivan vs Lesley Leonard / Maria Quicksell3-6, 7-5, 0-1
W#3 DoublesKristi Lightse / Whitney Petrie vs Caitlin McLaughlin / Lori Ganey6-1, 6-1
2024-09-28vs Hawk - Serving it up for SallySplit 11
L#1 DoublesHilary Broder / Kimberly LaRose vs Megan Wilhelm / Amanda Mason6-7, 4-6
W#3 DoublesJillian Zoltek / Whitney Petrie vs Leah Griswold / Lori Ganey6-2, 6-2
2024-09-23vs Dickerson 2.5-3.5Won 10
W#3 DoublesKate Flynn / Jillian Zoltek vs Erica Murray / Carol Bernard7-5, 6-3
2024-09-18vs Thongphok - Tennis Therapy TriWon 10
W#3 DoublesJillian Zoltek / Whitney Petrie vs Shaunte Taswell / Amy Soderstrum6-4, 6-2
2024-09-10vs Dickerson 2.5-3.5Split 11
L#1 DoublesKimberly LaRose / Julia Johnson vs Nikki Eyman / Kathleen Maiden4-6, 0-6
W#3 DoublesWhitney Petrie / Kristi Lightse vs Mugdha Samant / Taylor Clark6-0, 6-1
2024-09-08vs Dickerson 2.5-3.5Split 11
W#1 DoublesKimberly LaRose / Roxanna Nemec vs Nikki Eyman / Deborah Dettmer6-4, 5-2
L#3 DoublesAmanda Britton / Jillian Zoltek vs Mugdha Samant / Alanna Volatile6-3, 2-6, 0-1
2024-09-05vs Hawk - Serving it up for SallyWon 10
W#3 DoublesKate Flynn / Whitney Petrie vs Caitlin McLaughlin / Karen Libonate6-3, 6-1
2024-08-26vs Thongphok - Tennis Therapy TriWon 10
W#3 DoublesKate Flynn / Whitney Petrie vs Shaunte Taswell / Caitlin McLaughlin3-6, 6-2, 1-0
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 Frederick Tri-Level 3.5, 3.0, 2.5 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 2.93 estimated across 15 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.

3.53
Roxanna Nemec
usually #1 Doubles 42%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.23
Kimberly LaRose
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.05
Teresa Reefe
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.96
Kristy Sullivan
published
2.95
Joanna Ficklin
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.94
Taeko Wakasono
published
2.94
Whitney Petrie
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.93
Hilary Broder
published
2.92
Kathy Greene
published
2.89
Jillian Zoltek
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.87
Catherine Iosue
usually #3 Doubles 80%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published 3
2.81
Gail Shenk
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.80
Donna Jones
published
2.77
Monica DeAgostino
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.42
Kristi Lightse
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 2.5
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.

Joanna Ficklin + Gail Shenk10754% games+5.8% vs expected
Joanna Ficklin + Whitney Petrie5451% games−0.5% vs expected
Teresa Reefe + Monica DeAgostino72343% games−3.1% vs expected
Teresa Reefe + Gail Shenk5446% gamesnot enough data
Monica DeAgostino + Gail Shenk1539% gamesnot enough data
Whitney Petrie + Jillian Zoltek4158% gamesnot enough data
Whitney Petrie + Kristi Lightse314 matchesnot enough data
Catherine Iosue + Joanna Ficklin123 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
Roxanna Nemec
199W–121L career · 12 lines in 2024
41%59%<1%
3.53
3.5
Kimberly LaRose
146W–119L career · 3 lines in 2024
5%92%3%
3.23
3
Teresa Reefe
144W–118L career · 9 lines in 2024
<1%37%63%
3.05
Kristy Sullivan
6W–8L career · no lines in 2024
<1%61%38%
2.96
3
Joanna Ficklin
72W–80L career · 6 lines in 2024
<1%65%35%
2.95
Taeko Wakasono
16W–3L career · no lines in 2024
<1%68%32%
2.94
3
Whitney Petrie
126W–90L career · 7 lines in 2024
<1%68%32%
2.94
Hilary Broder
4W–14L career · no lines in 2024
68%32%<1%
2.93
Kathy Greene
31W–13L career · no lines in 2024
<1%71%28%
2.92
3
Jillian Zoltek
50W–29L career · 6 lines in 2024
<1%79%21%
2.89
3
Catherine Iosue
127W–112L career · 5 lines in 2024
<1%82%17%
2.87
3
Gail Shenk
131W–119L career · 3 lines in 2024
1%90%9%
2.81
Donna Jones
21W–21L career · no lines in 2024
2%91%7%
2.80
3
Monica DeAgostino
77W–123L career · 6 lines in 2024
3%92%5%
2.77
2.5
Kristi Lightse
22W–14L career · 2 lines in 2024
0%72%28%
2.42

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.