Teams

BCC RED

2024 CTA WOMEN'S DAYTIME DOUBLES - DEN · WOMEN 3.0 - DAYTIME

9 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 →
Schedule6 played
2024-06-19vs CVTA REDSplit 11
L#1 DoublesLaura Studebaker / Tricia Dessel vs Meagan Moss / Brooke Staton1-6, 3-6
W#2 DoublesCAROLYN PAUL / Melissa Ondash vs Tia Bach / Leslie Brodhead6-3, 7-6
2024-06-12vs BRMST GREENWon 20
W#1 DoublesDana Bickham / Melissa Ondash vs Sarah Hertzenberg / Valerie Hudson6-4, 1-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesLaura Studebaker / Susan Cooper vs Kelly O'Brien / Tracy Klein6-3, 6-2
2024-05-29vs MEA GREENLost 01
L#2 DoublesLaura Studebaker / Tricia Dessel vs Christine Belin / Lisa Vogt2-6, 1-6
2024-05-28vs RCC REDLost 01
L#2 DoublesTricia Dessel / Laura Studebaker vs Morgan Ernzen / Brenna Hermes4-6, 6-7
2024-05-22vs NJ PURPLEWon 10
W#3 DoublesLaura Studebaker / Tricia Dessel vs Kristin Walters / Susan Tomlinson5-7, 6-4, 1-0
2024-05-15vs TTA GREENWon 10
W#1 DoublesMelissa Ondash / Kelly Daly vs Stacy Hudson / Carey Price6-1, 6-4
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 WOMEN 3.0 - DAYTIME 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 2.75 estimated across 4 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
Amy Nichols
published 3
Dana Bickham
published 3
2.72
Melissa Ondash
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.69
Laura Studebaker
usually #3 Doubles 40%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 3
2.60
CAROLYN PAUL
published 3
Josephine Warfield
published
Kelly Daly
published
Richelle Burnett
published
Tricia Dessel
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.

Laura Studebaker + Melissa Ondash4162% games+15.6% vs expected
Laura Studebaker + Josephine Warfield213 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
Amy Nichols
28W–8L career · no lines in 2024
<1%57%43%
2.98
3
Dana Bickham
1W–3L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
3
Melissa Ondash
57W–47L career · 3 lines in 2024
5%92%2%
2.72
3
Laura Studebaker
96W–47L career · 5 lines in 2024
8%90%1%
2.69
3
CAROLYN PAUL
4W–9L career · no lines in 2024
24%76%<1%
2.60
Josephine Warfield
3W–4L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Kelly Daly
2W–2L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Richelle Burnett
1W–0L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Tricia Dessel
0W–4L career · no lines in 2024
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.