Teams

Wernet 3.5 18+ ES23

2023 ADULT 18 & OVER EARLY START · 3.5 WOMEN

13 players · average NTRP 3.60 / NORTHERN

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 →
Schedule5 played
L#2 DoublesKim Bartz / Amy Gleason vs Emily Starita / Ruth Eliason5-7, 4-6
L#1 DoublesKim Bartz / Amy Gleason vs Ellen Dobbins / Maggie Hillmer0-6, 1-6
2022-11-07Lost 01
L#2 DoublesAmy Gleason / Kim Bartz vs Kyla Bills / Sam Oren6-7, 1-6
2022-10-17vs Harris: Hit it! 18+ ES23Won 10
W#1 DoublesKim Bartz / Amy Gleason vs Marcia Harris / Renee McCloden6-4, 5-7, 1-0
W#1 DoublesKim Bartz / Amy Gleason vs Katie Day / Amy Stern7-6, 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 3.5 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 3.25 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.

3.61
Alla Epshteyn
published 4
3.55
Angel Nasrabadi
published 4
3.49
Sarah Curfman
published
3.44
Amy Gleason
published 3.5
3.41
Kim Bartz
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published
3.37
Amy Fishman
published 3.5
3.23
Heather Legris
published
3.10
Katie Wernet
published
3.08
Alyssa Lorenzen
published 3
3.03
Suzanne Benson
published
2.93
Jennifer Lewis
published
2.74
Lori Youmans
published
Tia Fjelstad
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.

Sarah Curfman + Katie Wernet5649% games−1.0% vs expected
Lori Youmans + Suzanne Benson1538% games−1.9% vs expected
Amy Gleason + Katie Wernet224 matchesnot enough data
Alyssa Lorenzen + Suzanne Benson224 matchesnot enough data
Tia Fjelstad + Jennifer Lewis033 matchesnot enough data
Amy Gleason + Alla Epshteyn213 matchesnot enough data
Lori Youmans + Alyssa Lorenzen033 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.

4
Alla Epshteyn
15W–6L career · no lines in 2023
21%79%<1%
3.61
4
Angel Nasrabadi
37W–28L career · no lines in 2023
35%65%<1%
3.55
Sarah Curfman
58W–42L career · no lines in 2023
<1%53%47%
3.49
3.5
Amy Gleason
28W–33L career · no lines in 2023
<1%65%35%
3.44
Kim Bartz
117W–122L career · 5 lines in 2023
<1%73%27%
3.41
3.5
Amy Fishman
18W–10L career · no lines in 2023
<1%81%18%
3.37
Heather Legris
26W–25L career · no lines in 2023
5%92%3%
3.23
Katie Wernet
13W–20L career · no lines in 2023
23%77%<1%
3.10
3
Alyssa Lorenzen
3W–9L career · no lines in 2023
<1%30%70%
3.08
Suzanne Benson
3W–8L career · no lines in 2023
42%58%<1%
3.03
Jennifer Lewis
28W–38L career · no lines in 2023
69%31%<1%
2.93
Lori Youmans
7W–16L career · no lines in 2023
97%3%<1%
2.74
Tia Fjelstad
0W–5L career · no lines in 2023
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.