Teams

Laabs

2022 Anne Arundel Tri-Level 18 & Over · Anne Arundel Tri-Level 3.5,3.0,2.5 Women

13 players · average NTRP 3.50 / MARYLAND

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2022-12-04vs LewandowskiWon 10
W#1 DoublesSherry Orebaugh / Jessica Butcher vs Aine McKee / Maria Nunnally6-3, 6-1
2022-11-06vs Orange SmashLost 01
L#1 DoublesClaire Rossmark / Sherry Orebaugh vs Holly Hill / Christine Driscoll3-6, 6-4, 1-0
2022-10-30vs GibbsWon 10
W#1 DoublesSherry Orebaugh / Kimberly Walko vs Dawn Orso / Stephanie Riley6-1, 6-2
2022-10-09vs GibbsLost 01
L#1 DoublesKimberly Walko / Sherry Orebaugh vs Dawn Orso / Elizabeth Jacobson4-6, 6-4, 0-1
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 Anne Arundel Tri-Level 3.5,3.0,2.5 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 3.31 estimated across 12 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.

3.55
June Means
published
3.49
Sherry Orebaugh
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.48
Gia Jang
published 3.5
3.45
Ay Rothany Koballa
published 3.5
3.43
Marie Sokoloff
usually #3 Doubles 57%, also #2 Doubles 43% · published 3.5
3.34
Lisa Walsh
published
3.26
Laura Laabs
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.25
Claire Rossmark
usually #1 Doubles 63%, also #3 Doubles 38% · published 3.5
3.20
Cindy Keegan
published 3.5
3.14
Kimberly Walko
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.12
Denise Browne
published 3.5
3.04
Nicole Gownley
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
Jessica Butcher
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.

June Means + Gia Jang3355% games+9.1% vs expected
Kimberly Walko + Sherry Orebaugh1448% games+4.8% vs expected
Claire Rossmark + Laura Laabs8951% games−4.3% vs expected
Claire Rossmark + Kimberly Walko3543% gamesnot enough data
Kimberly Walko + Laura Laabs2347% gamesnot enough data
Laura Laabs + Marie Sokoloff4164% gamesnot enough data
Kimberly Walko + Marie Sokoloff224 matchesnot enough data
Claire Rossmark + Lisa Walsh123 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.

June Means
8W–7L career · no lines in 2022
36%64%<1%
3.55
3.5
Sherry Orebaugh
110W–54L career · 4 lines in 2022
<1%52%48%
3.49
3.5
Gia Jang
11W–7L career · no lines in 2022
<1%56%44%
3.48
3.5
Ay Rothany Koballa
130W–122L career · no lines in 2022
<1%66%34%
3.45
3.5
Marie Sokoloff
277W–199L career · 7 lines in 2022
<1%71%28%
3.43
Lisa Walsh
24W–31L career · no lines in 2022
<1%88%11%
3.34
3.5
Laura Laabs
177W–206L career · 4 lines in 2022
2%94%3%
3.26
3.5
Claire Rossmark
147W–165L career · 8 lines in 2022
3%95%3%
3.25
3.5
Cindy Keegan
7W–16L career · no lines in 2022
6%93%1%
3.20
3.5
Kimberly Walko
160W–162L career · 8 lines in 2022
14%85%<1%
3.14
3.5
Denise Browne
11W–23L career · no lines in 2022
19%81%<1%
3.12
3.5
Nicole Gownley
58W–45L career · 6 lines in 2022
37%63%<1%
3.04
Jessica Butcher
4W–4L 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.