Teams

Nelson - Smash Force

2025 Montgomery Singles · Montgomery Singles 3.0 Women

9 players · average NTRP 3.00 / MARYLAND

View scouting list →
Schedule9 played
2025-09-05Won 10
W#3 SinglesJohanne Maher vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2025-08-26vs Smith - Sets In The CityWon 20
W#2 SinglesMercy Ovalle vs Alison Smith4-6, 6-1, 1-0
W#3 SinglesRobin Rudowitz vs Wendy Wasserman6-0, 6-0
2025-08-20vs Kau - Honey Deuce 3.0 SinglesLost 01
L#1 SinglesMercy Ovalle vs Xuan Du2-6, 2-4
2025-08-16vs Cornelius - All The Singles LadiesSplit 11
W#1 SinglesMercy Ovalle vs Margaret Cornelius5-7, 6-3, 1-0
L#3 SinglesJennifer Lora Gleason vs Daniella Casseres1-6, 2-6
2025-08-12vs Smith - Sets In The CityWon 20
W#2 SinglesGail Ribas vs Mugdha Samant6-2, 3-6, 1-0
W#3 SinglesMia Dentoni vs Alina Sharafutdinova6-3, 3-6, 1-0
W#1 SinglesCaroline Storer vs Margaret Cornelius6-2, 6-4
2025-07-25vs Kau - Honey Deuce 3.0 SinglesLost 02
L#1 SinglesCaroline Storer vs Bella Bidzhieva6-7, 2-6
L#3 SinglesRobin Rudowitz vs Jennifer Spence3-6, 4-6
2025-07-17vs Cornelius - All The Singles LadiesLost 02
L#1 SinglesMercy Ovalle vs Margaret Cornelius6-7, 3-6
L#3 SinglesJohanne Maher vs Emily Schabacker0-6, 1-6
2025-07-08vs Smith - Sets In The CityWon 20
W#1 SinglesCaroline Storer vs Justine Handelman6-0, 6-0
W#3 SinglesJennifer Lora Gleason vs Wendy Wasserman7-6, 5-2
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 2.86 estimated across 9 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.

3.03
Caroline Storer
usually #1 Singles 83%, also #2 Singles 17% · published 3
3.01
Mercy Ovalle
usually #1 Singles 75%, also #2 Singles 25% · published 3
2.95
Mia Dentoni
usually #3 Singles 100% · published
2.90
Robin Rudowitz
usually #3 Singles 100% · published 3
2.88
Elizabeth McLeod
published
2.87
Tanna Nelson
published
2.80
Jennifer Lora Gleason
usually #3 Singles 100% · published 3
2.71
Gail Ribas
usually #2 Singles 100% · published
2.61
Johanne Maher
usually #3 Singles 100% · published 3
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
Caroline Storer
39W–31L career · 6 lines in 2025
<1%41%59%
3.03
3
Mercy Ovalle
28W–13L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%46%54%
3.01
Mia Dentoni
5W–3L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%63%37%
2.95
3
Robin Rudowitz
25W–52L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%77%23%
2.90
Elizabeth McLeod
6W–7L career · no lines in 2025
<1%81%19%
2.88
Tanna Nelson
4W–4L career · no lines in 2025
<1%82%18%
2.87
3
Jennifer Lora Gleason
54W–38L career · 2 lines in 2025
2%91%7%
2.80
Gail Ribas
6W–5L career · 1 line in 2025
6%92%2%
2.71
3
Johanne Maher
15W–34L career · 2 lines in 2025
22%78%<1%
2.61

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.