Teams

SWW-Gerritzen

2024 One Doubles-Summer · 3.0 Women

4 players · average NTRP 3.00 / SOUTHWEST WASHINGTON

View scouting list →
Schedule10 played
2024-07-29vs Capestany-Valley Net SettersLost 01
L#1 DoublesDanielle Marston / Maria Smith vs Lacy Fehrenbach / Chandra VanPaepeghem6-4, 3-6, 0-1
2024-07-28vs Nichols/BlahnikWon 10
W#1 DoublesShannon Gerritzen / Erika Sagle vs Michelle Nichols / Samantha Blahnik6-1, 6-7, 1-0
2024-07-22vs Strayer/PawlitschekWon 10
W#1 DoublesShannon Gerritzen / Erika Sagle vs Jillian Strayer / Jennifer Weber6-4, 6-3
2024-07-16vs McPhee/SchmitzWon 10
W#1 DoublesDanielle Marston / Maria Smith vs Leslie Artman / Summer Murlless4-6, 7-6, 1-0
2024-07-12vs Walz/KimLost 01
L#1 DoublesShannon Gerritzen / Erika Sagle vs Maileen Walz / Mi Ae Kim6-3, 3-6, 0-1
2024-07-05vs King/TrelevenWon 10
W#1 DoublesShannon Gerritzen / Erika Sagle vs Laura King / Victoria Masselink3-6, 7-5, 1-0
2024-06-11vs VanDerscheldenWon 10
W#1 DoublesDanielle Marston / Maria Smith vs Shelly Hebert / Emalee Cardwell6-7, 6-4, 1-0
2024-06-07vs Cruz-Get A GripLost 01
L#1 DoublesShannon Gerritzen / Erika Sagle vs Jaime Brucker / Michelle Filomeo6-4, 1-6, 0-1
2024-05-25Won 10
W#1 DoublesShannon Gerritzen / Erika Sagle vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2024-05-21vs Cook-Doubles FunWon 10
W#1 DoublesDanielle Marston / Maria Smith vs Karen Cook / Laura Jones6-3, 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 standings11 teams · 3.0 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Capestany-Valley Net Setters9191561
2SWW-Gerritzen73731089
3Strayer/Pawlitschek73731181
4Walz/Kim64641184
5McPhee/Schmitz55551183
6Nichols/Blahnik45451293
7VanDerschelden464612102
8Cruz-Get A Grip464614104
9Nemetz-Slice Girls36361495
10Cook-Doubles Fun373717104
11King/Treleven282816102

Ordered by team wins, then losses, then sets lost — the order USTA uses to seed a flight. Individual wins are lines, not ties.

See the full flight, with every team’s record

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 2.86 estimated across 4 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.

3.08
Maria Smith
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.99
Erika Sagle
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.70
Danielle Marston
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.66
Shannon Gerritzen
usually #1 Doubles 100% · 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.

Shannon Gerritzen + Erika Sagle81249% games+5.0% vs expected
Shannon Gerritzen + Danielle Marston201255% games+3.9% vs expected
Maria Smith + Danielle Marston3445% games−1.6% vs expected
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.

3
Maria Smith
78W–70L career · 4 lines in 2024
<1%29%71%
3.08
3
Erika Sagle
44W–42L career · 6 lines in 2024
<1%52%48%
2.99
3
Danielle Marston
62W–47L career · 14 lines in 2024
8%91%2%
2.70
3
Shannon Gerritzen
57W–64L career · 16 lines in 2024
12%87%1%
2.66

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.