Teams

HCC Lines 3.0

2022 Richmond Adult 18 & Over Weekday Women · Richmond Adult 18 & Over 3.0 Women

15 players · average NTRP 3.25 / VIRGINIA

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
2022-06-20vs ACAC Townsend / JonesWon 10
W#1 DoublesAMY LINES / Stephanie Yablonski vs Ali Silva / Daphne Cole6-1, 6-0
2022-06-16vs SCC SchwartzSplit 11
W#1 SinglesAMY LINES vs Sally Hurt6-0, 6-1
L#2 DoublesStephanie Yablonski / Susan Mangin vs Stacey Gray / Colleen Weisiger7-5, 4-6, 0-1
2022-06-13vs Westwood CaudillWon 10
W#1 DoublesStephanie Yablonski / Kathleen Crotty vs Ashley Sommardahl / Nada Golden6-0, 6-2
2022-06-09vs TDC McCormickWon 10
W#1 DoublesAMY LINES / Sarah Martin vs Megan Lyness / Heather Long6-1, 6-2
2022-05-31vs ACAC QuilezWon 20
W#1 DoublesAMY LINES / Abbey Orski vs Irene Quilez / Carole Camden6-2, 6-0
W#3 DoublesCarrie Boyd / Stephanie Yablonski vs N/A6-0, 6-0
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 Richmond Adult 18 & Over 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 3.13 estimated across 13 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.

3.97
AMY LINES
usually #1 Singles 38%, also #1 Doubles 38% · published 4
3.84
Abbey Orski
published 4
3.63
Kathleen Crotty
published
3.53
Lauren McKetta
published
3.38
Stephanie Yablonski
usually #1 Doubles 44%, also #3 Doubles 22% · published 3.5
3.34
Brittany Nichols
published 3.5
3.29
Sarah Martin
published
3.04
Kimberly Ross
published
2.92
2.68
AIMEE DABNEY
published 3
2.43
Amanda Core
published 2.5
2.35
Lisa de Groot
published
2.23
Beth Stuckey
published 2.5
Stephanie Painter
published
Susan Mangin
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.

Stephanie Yablonski + AMY LINES18170% games+20.2% vs expected
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
AMY LINES
220W–87L career · 8 lines in 2022
<1%58%42%
3.97
4
Abbey Orski
15W–10L career · no lines in 2022
<1%89%11%
3.84
Kathleen Crotty
19W–11L career · no lines in 2022
15%85%<1%
3.63
Lauren McKetta
13W–2L career · no lines in 2022
<1%41%59%
3.53
3.5
Stephanie Yablonski
124W–88L career · 9 lines in 2022
<1%82%17%
3.38
3.5
Brittany Nichols
14W–5L career · no lines in 2022
<1%88%11%
3.34
Sarah Martin
15W–8L career · no lines in 2022
1%94%5%
3.29
Kimberly Ross
11W–5L career · no lines in 2022
37%63%<1%
3.04
3
Elizabeth Wiertel
29W–21L career · no lines in 2022
<1%72%28%
2.92
3
AIMEE DABNEY
13W–13L career · no lines in 2022
8%91%1%
2.68
2.5
Amanda Core
4W–7L career · no lines in 2022
0%71%29%
2.43
Lisa de Groot
0W–6L career · no lines in 2022
88%12%<1%
2.35
2.5
Beth Stuckey
10W–5L career · no lines in 2022
0%98%2%
2.23
Stephanie Painter
11W–8L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Susan Mangin
2W–0L career · no lines in 2022
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.