Teams

TAG YELLOW

2026 TRIO - NOCO · WOMEN 3.0 - TRIO - NOCO

7 players · average NTRP 3.00 / COLORADO

No matches recorded for this roster in this league — it may be a placeholder registration, or the season may not have started.

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2026-04-25vs FCCC REDWon 20
W#1 DoublesEmily Heckel / Kaitlyn Chenore vs Emily Davidson / Libbie Hickman6-2, 6-3
W#2 DoublesRachel Baldwin / Lori Mooney-Malone vs Janice Brooks / Denise Benz6-3, 6-0
2026-04-18vs CSU GREENSplit 11
W#1 DoublesAmy Herold / Sandy Chenore vs Amy Molina / Amy Dahlgren6-3, 4-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesRebecca Moore / Thora Pabst vs Audrie Diel / Wendy Sprague4-6, 6-2, 0-1
2026-04-04vs HMTC PURPLEWon 30
W#1 DoublesKaitlyn Chenore / Rachel Baldwin vs Kristin Daniels / Molly Bond6-4, 7-6
W#1 SinglesEmily Heckel vs Michelle Fang6-2, 6-3
W#2 DoublesSandy Chenore / Amy Herold vs Kelsi Wagner / Tracy Sanders6-4, 1-6, 1-0
2026-03-28vs FCCC ORANGELost 02
L#1 DoublesEmily Heckel / Lori Mooney-Malone vs Hannah Burns / Carsen Bahn0-6, 5-7
L#2 DoublesThora Pabst / Sandy Chenore vs Deanna Verchick / Ashley McLaughlin4-6, 4-6
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 standings2 teams · WOMEN 3.0 - TRIO - NOCO
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1TAG YELLOW226614112
2MLF WHITE237816121

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 2.71 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.

2.88
Rachel Baldwin
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
2.83
Lori Mooney-Malone
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.82
Emily Heckel
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #1 Singles 33% · published
2.74
Kaitlyn Chenore
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.69
Amy Herold
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.54
Sandy Chenore
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
2.46
Thora Pabst
usually #2 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.

Rachel Baldwin + Emily Heckel4164% games+13.1% vs expected
Kaitlyn Chenore + Rachel Baldwin5350% games+2.1% vs expected
Sandy Chenore + Amy Herold4442% games−3.7% vs expected
Thora Pabst + Lori Mooney-Malone1538% gamesnot enough data
Thora Pabst + Amy Herold134 matchesnot enough data
Kaitlyn Chenore + Emily Heckel224 matchesnot enough data
Sandy Chenore + Kaitlyn Chenore213 matchesnot enough data
Amy Herold + Lori Mooney-Malone213 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.

Rachel Baldwin
15W–7L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%81%19%
2.88
3
Lori Mooney-Malone
18W–35L career · 2 lines in 2026
1%88%11%
2.83
Emily Heckel
13W–5L career · 3 lines in 2026
1%89%10%
2.82
Kaitlyn Chenore
11W–9L career · 2 lines in 2026
5%92%3%
2.74
3
Amy Herold
11W–14L career · 2 lines in 2026
8%90%1%
2.69
Sandy Chenore
8W–11L career · 3 lines in 2026
40%60%<1%
2.54
3
Thora Pabst
30W–85L career · type A · 2 lines in 2026
60%40%<1%
2.46

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.