Teams

MLagerstedt

2022 Capital Summer 18 & Over Singles League · 2.5 Women

8 players · average NTRP 3.00 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2022-08-01vs MLHastySplit 11
W#2 SinglesBeth Gildea vs Mary Elizabeth Miller6-2, 6-1
L#3 SinglesLaura Wingo vs Miriam Waters1-6, 1-6
2022-07-25vs MParisLost 01
L#3 SinglesMichele Lagerstedt vs Christina LeLiever1-6, 6-4, 0-1
2022-07-18vs SFitzpatrickWon 20
W#1 SinglesMelanie Hewitt vs Alice Touchette6-2, 6-2
W#2 SinglesBeth Gildea vs Cameron Jones6-1, 6-3
2022-07-12vs DRusnakLost 01
L#1 SinglesBeth Gildea vs Natalie Norris6-4, 3-6, 0-1
2022-07-11Won 10
W#3 SinglesMelanie Hewitt vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2022-06-20vs LMcReeLost 02
L#1 SinglesMelanie Hewitt vs Naomi Rodrigues4-6, 1-6
L#2 SinglesBrianna Shait vs Sarah Ferguson1-6, 3-6
2022-06-13vs GilreathLost 01
L#3 SinglesLaura Wingo vs Rossi Evans1-6, 1-6
2022-06-06vs JKaulbackLost 02
L#1 SinglesBrianna Shait vs Jennifer Kaulback2-6, 0-6
L#2 SinglesLaura Wingo vs Wendy Teeter0-6, 3-6
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 standings for 2.5 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 2.60 estimated across 8 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.

2.98
Melanie Hewitt
usually #1 Singles 67%, also #3 Singles 33% · published 3.5
2.88
Beth Gildea
usually #2 Singles 67%, also #1 Singles 33% · published 3
2.84
Brianna Shait
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #2 Singles 50% · published 3
2.82
Michele Lagerstedt
usually #3 Singles 100% · published 3
2.70
Erin Maher
published 3
2.47
Lauren Lelewski
published
2.09
Laura Wingo
usually #3 Singles 67%, also #2 Singles 33% · published 2.5
2.02
Mindy Hamlin
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.

Michele Lagerstedt + Laura Wingo404 matchesnot enough data
Beth Gildea + Brianna Shait314 matchesnot enough data
Melanie Hewitt + Brianna Shait314 matchesnot enough data
Michele Lagerstedt + Melanie Hewitt123 matchesnot enough data
Michele Lagerstedt + Brianna Shait033 matchesnot enough data
Beth Gildea + Melanie Hewitt213 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
Melanie Hewitt
94W–57L career · 3 lines in 2022
55%45%<1%
2.98
3
Beth Gildea
89W–30L career · 3 lines in 2022
<1%82%18%
2.88
3
Brianna Shait
86W–65L career · 2 lines in 2022
<1%89%11%
2.84
3
Michele Lagerstedt
58W–62L career · 1 line in 2022
1%91%8%
2.82
3
Erin Maher
10W–7L career · no lines in 2022
6%93%1%
2.70
Lauren Lelewski
3W–14L career · no lines in 2022
58%42%<1%
2.47
2.5
Laura Wingo
29W–57L career · 3 lines in 2022
0%>99%<1%
2.09
Mindy Hamlin
1W–8L career · no lines in 2022
>99%<1%<1%
2.02

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.