Teams

ESB:Lobsters:Ruwet/Gaida

2024 VT Adult 18 & Over Flex Women's Doubles · 3.0 Women

4 players · average NTRP / VERMONT

View scouting list →
Schedule9 played
2024-07-27vs ESP:Volley Girls:SmithWon 10
W#1 DoublesKathryn Ruwet / Gini Park vs Karen Smith / Deborah Norotsky6-7, 6-5, 1-0
2024-07-21vs ESB:Double Trouble:Webster/SmithLost 01
L#1 DoublesGini Park / Gretchen Gaida Michaels vs Evelyn Norris / Lisa Merrill1-6, 4-6
2024-07-19vs ESB:BABS:SinopoliLost 01
L#1 DoublesMegan OBrien / Kathryn Ruwet vs Lori Durieux / Eileen Sinopoli4-6, 1-6
2024-06-30vs ESP:Volley Girls:SmithLost 01
L#1 DoublesGretchen Gaida Michaels / Megan OBrien vs Kristin Walsh / Deborah Norotsky6-7, 1-6
2024-06-28vs ESB:Double Trouble:Webster/SmithWon 10
W#1 DoublesMegan OBrien / Gini Park vs Lisa Merrill / Maja Smith6-3, 6-2
2024-06-23vs ESB:BABS:SinopoliLost 01
L#1 DoublesKathryn Ruwet / Gretchen Gaida Michaels vs Nicole Hansen / Eileen Sinopoli2-6, 6-4, 0-1
2024-06-16vs ESP:Volley Girls:SmithLost 01
L#1 DoublesGini Park / Kathryn Ruwet vs Mary Beth Pinard / Karen Smith2-6, 1-6
2024-06-08vs ESB:Double Trouble:Webster/SmithLost 01
L#1 DoublesGini Park / Gretchen Gaida Michaels vs Evelyn Norris / Maja Smith1-6, 6-7
2024-05-18vs ESB:BABS:SinopoliWon 10
W#1 DoublesKathryn Ruwet / Megan OBrien vs Eileen Sinopoli / Alexa Mann6-1, 2-6, 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 standings4 teams · 3.0 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1ESP:Volley Girls:Smith6363667
2ESB:Double Trouble:Webster/Smith5454978
3ESB:BABS:Sinopoli45451388
4ESB:Lobsters:Ruwet/Gaida36361497

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 2.66 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.

2.84
Gini Park
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.63
Kathryn Ruwet
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.61
Megan OBrien
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.57
Gretchen Gaida Michaels
usually #1 Doubles 100% · 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.

Megan OBrien + Gini Park3446% games+9.2% vs expected
Megan OBrien + Kathryn Ruwet3343% games+0.1% vs expected
Gini Park + Kathryn Ruwet3940% games−5.6% vs expected
Megan OBrien + Gretchen Gaida Michaels2636% games−8.9% vs expected
Kathryn Ruwet + Gretchen Gaida Michaels0723% games−17.5% vs expected
Gini Park + Gretchen Gaida Michaels1435% gamesnot 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.

Gini Park
12W–24L career · 5 lines in 2024
1%86%13%
2.84
Kathryn Ruwet
9W–21L career · 5 lines in 2024
17%82%<1%
2.63
Megan OBrien
13W–36L career · 4 lines in 2024
22%78%<1%
2.61
Gretchen Gaida Michaels
5W–21L career · 4 lines in 2024
32%68%<1%
2.57

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.