Teams

Keswick

2022 Charlottesville Adult 18 & Over Women · Charlottesville Adult 18 & Over 3.0 Women

9 players · average NTRP 2.94 / VIRGINIA

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
2022-06-08vs ACAC - Crooked RacquetsWon 10
W#2 DoublesSusan Cabell Mains / Donna Horn vs Ann Hague / Diane Simon6-3, 6-2
2022-06-01vs BHSC - Hoover/HapgoodLost 01
L#2 DoublesSusan Cabell Mains / Elizabeth Boylan vs Silvia Blemker / Mary Wagoner4-6, 3-6
2022-05-18vs Forest LakesWon 10
W#3 DoublesSusan Cabell Mains / Donna Horn vs Beth Kohler / Shauna Hogg6-1, 6-1
2022-05-13Lost 01
L#2 DoublesSusan Cabell Mains / Susan Tracy vs Amy Webb / Tobyjoy Gonias2-6, 1-6
2022-04-13vs BHS - McCullochLost 01
L#1 DoublesSusan Cabell Mains / Anais Gupton vs Karen Overman / Michele Rowan1-6, 1-6
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 Charlottesville 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 2.60 estimated across 7 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.

2.95
Susan Tracy
published
2.85
Anais Gupton
published 3
2.83
Elizabeth Boylan
published 3
Donna Horn
published 3
Jessica Johnson
published 3
2.53
Susan Cabell Mains
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #1 Doubles 20% · published 3
2.42
Janet Silvester
published 3
2.32
Amelia Black
published 3
2.32
Sharon Merrick
published 2.5
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.

Janet Silvester + Sharon Merrick2938% gamesnot enough data
Janet Silvester + Susan Cabell Mains3537% gamesnot enough data
Susan Cabell Mains + Sharon Merrick1434% gamesnot enough data
Amelia Black + Janet Silvester033 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.

Susan Tracy
2W–5L career · no lines in 2022
<1%64%36%
2.95
3
Anais Gupton
2W–1L career · no lines in 2022
<1%88%12%
2.85
3
Elizabeth Boylan
4W–4L career · no lines in 2022
1%90%9%
2.83
3
Donna Horn
1W–1L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
3
Jessica Johnson
no matches on record · no lines in 2022
not enough data
3
Susan Cabell Mains
61W–85L career · type A · 5 lines in 2022
41%59%<1%
2.53
3
Janet Silvester
30W–68L career · no lines in 2022
74%26%<1%
2.42
3
Amelia Black
0W–8L career · no lines in 2022
92%8%<1%
2.32
2.5
Sharon Merrick
31W–70L career · no lines in 2022
0%92%8%
2.32

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.