Teams

Avalon Oostdyk

2021 Richmond Adult 18 & Over Weekday Women · Richmond Weekday Adult 18 & Over Women 3.0

12 players · average NTRP 2.88 / VIRGINIA

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
2021-06-29vs Twin Hickory ChalkWon 20
W#1 DoublesShannon Couvillion / Mary Spencer Blanton vs Sheri Collins / Suzanne Pericle7-6, 6-3
W#1 SinglesEmily Mason vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2021-06-17Won 20
W#1 SinglesEmily Mason vs Janelle Sullivan4-6, 6-3, 1-0
W#2 DoublesMary Spencer Blanton / Alice Brown vs Brooke Wick / Tracy Collier6-2, 6-4
2021-06-10vs TDC BraggLost 01
L#1 SinglesMary Spencer Blanton vs Elizabeth Walkley2-6, 0-6
2021-05-27vs Kanawha PleasantsLost 02
L#1 DoublesJeanne Oostdyk / Mary Spencer Blanton vs Angela Kennedy / Jennifer Owens0-6, 5-7
L#1 SinglesEmily Mason vs Sara Winterhoff0-6, 4-6
2021-05-17Lost 02
L#1 SinglesEmily Mason vs Kerry Kablack2-6, 1-6
L#2 SinglesMary Spencer Blanton vs Molly Smith6-4, 3-6, 0-1
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 Richmond Weekday Adult 18 & Over Women 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 2.74 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.

3.24
Mary Spencer Blanton
usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #2 Singles 20% · published
3.15
Sarah Treharne
published
3.04
Linse Henley
published
3.00
Emily Mason
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 3.5
2.81
Jeanne Oostdyk
published
Alice Brown
published 3
2.49
Cynthia Iracane
published 2.5
2.36
Susan Hallett
published
2.34
Shannon Couvillion
published
2.26
Martha Luchsinger
published
Frances Thrift
published 2.5
Maureen Frink
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.

Mary Spencer Blanton + Emily Mason2349% gamesnot enough data
Martha Luchsinger + Susan Hallett224 matchesnot enough data
Shannon Couvillion + Susan Hallett123 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.

Mary Spencer Blanton
82W–58L career · 5 lines in 2021
3%95%2%
3.24
Sarah Treharne
9W–4L career · no lines in 2021
<1%13%87%
3.15
Linse Henley
0W–4L career · no lines in 2021
36%64%<1%
3.04
3.5
Emily Mason
114W–86L career · 4 lines in 2021
50%50%<1%
3.00
Jeanne Oostdyk
20W–13L career · no lines in 2021
1%92%7%
2.81
3
Alice Brown
0W–1L career · type S · no lines in 2021
not enough data
2.5
Cynthia Iracane
16W–20L career · no lines in 2021
0%52%48%
2.49
Susan Hallett
16W–19L career · no lines in 2021
0%87%13%
2.36
Shannon Couvillion
4W–11L career · no lines in 2021
89%11%<1%
2.34
Martha Luchsinger
7W–12L career · no lines in 2021
0%97%3%
2.26
2.5
Frances Thrift
0W–1L career · no lines in 2021
not enough data
Maureen Frink
1W–1L career · no lines in 2021
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.