← Teams

Net Setters

2023 Montgomery Singles Summer · Montgomery Singles 3.0 Women

8 players · average NTRP 3.10 / MARYLAND

View scouting list →
Schedule9 played
2023-08-28vs JuanLost 0–2
L#2 SinglesKaren Cheeks vs Xuan Du3-6, 0-6
L#3 SinglesNikki Eyman vs Wenxi Li5-7, 1-6
2023-08-23vs Pop & LockSplit 1–1
W#2 SinglesDenese Cavanaugh vs Angela Sharma7-5, 6-0
L#3 SinglesMaria Angelica Camp vs Laura Jairam1-6, 1-6
2023-08-14vs JuanLost 1–2
W#1 SinglesDenese Cavanaugh vs Lemin Xiao6-2, 6-2
L#2 SinglesNikki Eyman vs Jocelyn Lin6-7, 1-6
L#3 SinglesPrashila Dullabh vs Wenxi Li4-6, 1-3
2023-08-10vs Pop & LockWon 2–0
W#2 SinglesDenese Cavanaugh vs Mia Dentoni6-1, 2-2
W#3 SinglesKaren Cheeks vs Wendy Wicker6-3, 6-2
2023-07-30vs Pop & LockLost 0–1
L#2 SinglesKaren Cheeks vs Emily Schabacker4-6, 5-7
2023-07-28vs Pop & LockWon 1–0
W#2 SinglesPrashila Dullabh vs Mia Dentoni6-2, 6-2
2023-07-24vs JuanLost 0–1
L#2 SinglesPrashila Dullabh vs Rui Liu0-6, 6-7
2023-07-15vs Pop & LockLost 0–1
L#1 SinglesNikki Eyman vs Tanna Nelson2-6, 7-6, 0-1
2023-07-08vs JuanWon 1–0
W#2 SinglesMaria Angelica Camp vs Chao Wang6-1, 6-3
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 Montgomery Singles 3.0 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 2.94 estimated across 7 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.

3.17
Nikki Eyman
usually #1 Singles 33%, also #2 Singles 33% · published 3.5
3.11
Prashila Dullabh
usually #2 Singles 67%, also #3 Singles 33% · published 3
2.96
Maria Angelica Camp
usually #2 Singles 50%, also #3 Singles 50% · published 3
2.89
Karen Cheeks
usually #2 Singles 67%, also #3 Singles 33% · published 3
2.88
Denese Cavanaugh
usually #2 Singles 67%, also #1 Singles 33% · published 3
2.85
Jennifer Spence
published —
2.73
Jennifer Donaghue
published —
—
Shari Gronvall
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.

Maria Angelica Camp + Nikki Eyman2–24 matchesnot enough data
Maria Angelica Camp + Denese Cavanaugh2–13 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.

3.5
Nikki Eyman
233W–188L career · 3 lines in 2023
10%89%1%
3.17
3
Prashila Dullabh
91W–60L career · 3 lines in 2023
<1%20%80%
3.11
3
Maria Angelica Camp
144W–113L career · 2 lines in 2023
<1%61%39%
2.96
3
Karen Cheeks
66W–48L career · 3 lines in 2023
<1%80%20%
2.89
3
Denese Cavanaugh
147W–104L career · 3 lines in 2023
<1%82%18%
2.88
—
Jennifer Spence
10W–7L career · no lines in 2023
<1%88%12%
2.85
—
Jennifer Donaghue
7W–14L career · no lines in 2023
4%94%2%
2.73
—
Shari Gronvall
1W–2L 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.