Teams

HCC - D. Agnew

2023 Hillsborough Combo 18 & Over · 9.5 Women

10 players · average NTRP 4.60 / REGION_3

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2023-10-29vs Hills/C. Dorothy/18&Over9.5WLost 01
L#2 DoublesAvery Zercoe / Natalie Paiva vs Christina Dorothy / Dagmar O'Rourke6-2, 4-6, 0-1
2023-10-22vs HCC - S. StandLost 01
L#2 DoublesMaria Drew / Avery Zercoe vs Lauren Corcoran / Asbel Giang3-6, 3-6
2023-10-08vs Hills/C. Dorothy/18&Over9.5WLost 01
L#2 DoublesChristine Rondeau / Avery Zercoe vs Gail Gibson / Stephanie Means3-6, 5-7
2023-10-01vs HCC - S. StandWon 30
W#1 DoublesDenise Agnew / Elizabeth Baldwin vs Maria Stand / Sonia Patrick6-2, 6-2
W#2 DoublesRikke Kemp / Joan Simmons vs Olivia Rivas / Nicole Allen7-6, 6-2
W#3 DoublesLisa Balsera / Lilivette Arroyo vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2023-09-17vs Hills/C. Dorothy/18&Over9.5WWon 10
W#3 DoublesElizabeth Baldwin / Denise Agnew vs Maki Smith / Gueisy Herrmann6-1, 6-2
2023-09-10vs HCC - S. StandSplit 11
L#1 DoublesLilivette Arroyo / Rikke Kemp vs Sonia Patrick / Andrea Fajardo3-6, 6-4, 0-1
W#2 DoublesJoan Simmons / Elizabeth Baldwin vs Daniella Arcila / Olivia Rivas6-3, 6-1
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 9.5 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 4.41 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.

4.80
Natalie Paiva
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
4.65
4.48
Avery Zercoe
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
4.40
Elizabeth Rodgers
published 4.5
4.40
Lisa Ross
published
4.38
Denise Agnew
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 4.5
4.34
Lilivette Arroyo
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 4.5
4.19
Rikke Kemp
published
4.09
Joan Simmons
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Melissa Pine
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.

Lisa Ross + Elizabeth Rodgers6257% games+4.2% vs expected
Denise Agnew + Avery Zercoe17362% games+0.2% vs expected
Joan Simmons + Denise Agnew7357% gamesnot enough data
Natalie Paiva + Lilivette Arroyo044 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.

Natalie Paiva
22W–20L career · 1 line in 2023
1%93%6%
4.80
5
Elizabeth Baldwin
2W–8L career · no lines in 2023
12%87%<1%
4.65
4.5
Avery Zercoe
67W–20L career · 3 lines in 2023
<1%57%43%
4.48
4.5
Elizabeth Rodgers
6W–2L career · no lines in 2023
<1%78%22%
4.40
Lisa Ross
6W–2L career · no lines in 2023
<1%78%22%
4.40
4.5
Denise Agnew
97W–36L career · 2 lines in 2023
<1%82%17%
4.38
4.5
Lilivette Arroyo
50W–36L career · 2 lines in 2023
<1%89%11%
4.34
Rikke Kemp
1W–5L career · no lines in 2023
8%92%1%
4.19
Joan Simmons
94W–51L career · 2 lines in 2023
24%76%<1%
4.09
Melissa Pine
2W–0L career · no lines in 2023
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.