Teams

YTC - Cosmo Girls

2025 Adult 18 & Over · 4.0 WOMEN

11 players · average NTRP 3.93 / EASTERN WASHINGTON

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2025-02-23vs PC-HolleLost 23
L#1 DoublesAngie Meloy / Molly Carlson vs Dana Holle / Diana Titechko6-4, 5-7, 0-1
L#1 SinglesNancy Livingston vs Amy Fuller2-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesEstelle Patten / Stephanie Flowers vs Molly Kirkham / Alisha Nguyen4-6, 1-6
W#2 SinglesDaphne Reilly vs Erin Rinabarger6-2, 6-1
W#3 DoublesHeather Rinden / Megan Beyer vs Val Otto / Stacey Neal7-5, 5-7, 1-0
2025-02-23vs IND-RoseLost 14
L#1 DoublesLarisa Flory / Nancy Livingston vs Lisa Chapman / Amy Nguyen5-7, 6-2, 0-1
W#1 SinglesDaphne Reilly vs Cassandra Dicken6-7, 6-4, 1-0
L#2 DoublesHeather Rinden / Megan Beyer vs Rise Hawley / Kathleen McAteer6-7, 4-6
L#2 SinglesAnne Rojan vs Kira Burt6-3, 0-6, 0-1
L#3 DoublesAngie Meloy / Molly Carlson vs Maria Uy / Michelle Glenn5-7, 1-6
2025-02-22vs IND-RoseLost 23
W#1 DoublesMegan Beyer / Heather Rinden vs Lisa Chapman / Rathini Woodworth4-6, 7-5, 1-0
L#1 SinglesAnne Rojan vs Allison Atkinson3-6, 4-6
L#2 DoublesEstelle Patten / Larisa Flory vs Jody Davey / Annette Rose2-6, 4-6
W#2 SinglesDaphne Reilly vs Karen Madsen6-1, 6-2
L#3 DoublesStephanie Flowers / Angie Meloy vs Rise Hawley / Kathleen McAteer0-6, 5-7
2025-02-22vs HRAC-CarterWon 32
W#1 DoublesLarisa Flory / Nancy Livingston vs Erica Mitchell / Keely Kopetz6-2, 6-1
L#1 SinglesDaphne Reilly vs Christina Cork2-6, 1-6
W#2 DoublesAnne Rojan / Molly Carlson vs Amy Foley / Sarah Marcille6-3, 5-7, 1-0
L#2 SinglesAngie Meloy vs Mary Klinger0-6, 2-6
W#3 DoublesEstelle Patten / Stephanie Flowers vs Anne Kelly / Leslie Jones6-4, 6-2
2025-02-21vs HRAC-CarterLost 23
L#1 DoublesHeather Rinden / Megan Beyer vs Mary Klinger / Keely Kopetz6-7, 0-6
L#1 SinglesAnne Rojan vs Christina Cork2-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesMarcie Ehlis / Stephanie Flowers vs JENNIFER BELOY / Erica Mitchell6-7, 1-6
W#2 SinglesDaphne Reilly vs Anne Kelly6-2, 6-2
W#3 DoublesNancy Livingston / Larisa Flory vs Sarah Marcille / Leslie Jones6-4, 6-4
2025-02-21vs PC-HolleWon 41
W#1 DoublesStephanie Flowers / Angie Meloy vs Dana Holle / Diana Titechko6-2, 5-7, 1-0
W#1 SinglesDaphne Reilly vs Molly Kirkham6-2, 6-1
W#2 DoublesAnne Rojan / Megan Beyer vs Jolene Boughton / Xia Suter6-1, 6-4
L#2 SinglesHeather Rinden vs Alisha Nguyen2-6, 3-6
W#3 DoublesNancy Livingston / Larisa Flory vs Erica Clontz / Judy Knox1-6, 6-3, 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 standings for 4.0 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 3.59 estimated across 11 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.

3.91
Daphne Reilly
usually #2 Singles 50%, also #1 Singles 50% · published 4
3.88
Anne Rojan
usually #2 Singles 43%, also #1 Singles 29% · published 4
3.75
Stephanie Flowers
usually #2 Doubles 43%, also #3 Doubles 43% · published 4.5
3.72
Larisa Flory
usually #3 Doubles 40%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published
3.65
Heather Rinden
usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #2 Singles 20% · published
3.63
Megan Beyer
usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 4
3.58
Marcie Ehlis
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.44
Angie Meloy
usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
3.36
Estelle Patten
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
3.33
Molly Carlson
usually #2 Singles 25%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.28
Nancy Livingston
usually #1 Doubles 43%, also #3 Doubles 29% · 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.

Daphne Reilly + Molly Carlson7353% games+8.7% vs expected
Stephanie Flowers + Estelle Patten2442% games+2.2% vs expected
Marcie Ehlis + Anne Rojan4158% games+0.9% vs expected
Stephanie Flowers + Marcie Ehlis1439% games−0.0% vs expected
Heather Rinden + Megan Beyer3347% games−2.5% vs expected
Megan Beyer + Estelle Patten1438% gamesnot enough data
Megan Beyer + Anne Rojan314 matchesnot enough data
Nancy Livingston + Larisa Flory314 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.

4
Daphne Reilly
40W–19L career · 6 lines in 2025
<1%74%26%
3.91
4
Anne Rojan
47W–32L career · 7 lines in 2025
<1%81%19%
3.88
4.5
Stephanie Flowers
29W–60L career · 7 lines in 2025
96%4%<1%
3.75
Larisa Flory
11W–13L career · 5 lines in 2025
6%92%2%
3.72
Heather Rinden
9W–11L career · 5 lines in 2025
15%85%1%
3.65
4
Megan Beyer
24W–34L career · 5 lines in 2025
18%82%<1%
3.63
4
Marcie Ehlis
40W–41L career · 1 line in 2025
28%71%<1%
3.58
3.5
Angie Meloy
15W–22L career · 5 lines in 2025
<1%67%33%
3.44
Estelle Patten
19W–31L career · 3 lines in 2025
1%84%15%
3.36
3.5
Molly Carlson
31W–30L career · 4 lines in 2025
1%88%11%
3.33
Nancy Livingston
65W–43L career · 7 lines in 2025
2%92%6%
3.28

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.