Teams

Bonanno-Burns/18s/3.5,3.0,2.5/PAC

2025 Man · Cov Tri Level 18 & Over - Women Night

16 players · average NTRP 3.19 / LOUISIANA

View scouting list →
Schedule
Flight standings5 teams · Cov Tri Level 18 & Over - Women Night
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Schof/18s/3.5,3.0,2.5/SC Night7121311147
2Bonanno-Burns/18s/3.5,3.0,2.5/PAC6217718187
3Anzalone/18s/3.5,3.0,2.5/NC44111326191
4Greer-Bouche/18s/3.5,3.0,2.5/PAC2681637251
5Guillet/18s/3.5,3.0,2.5/COQ1732145272

Ordered by team wins, then losses, then sets lost — the order USTA uses to seed a flight. Individual wins are lines, not ties.

See the full flight, with every team’s record

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 2.92 estimated across 11 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.

3.64
Abby Hunt
usually #1 Doubles 79%, also #2 Doubles 13% · published 3.5
3.26
Brooke Brown
usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.22
Erin Lorio
usually #1 Doubles 56%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published 3.5
3.20
Dana Gegenheimer
usually #3 Doubles 44%, also #2 Doubles 22% · published 3.5
3.02
Laura Bonanno
usually #2 Doubles 42%, also #3 Doubles 38% · published
2.96
Molly Burns
usually #3 Doubles 36%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
2.80
Kristin Higbee
usually #3 Doubles 36%, also #1 Singles 24% · published
2.76
Jamie Vogel
usually #3 Doubles 42%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.66
Beth Almond
usually #1 Doubles 36%, also #3 Doubles 32% · published 3
2.52
Diane Matherne
usually #3 Doubles 52%, also #1 Doubles 24% · published 3
2.10
Elizabeth Klocek
usually #3 Doubles 35%, also #1 Doubles 29% · published 2.5
Joelle Cuevas
usually #3 Doubles 46%, also #1 Doubles 28% · published
Katherine Gristina
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
Laura Lucas
usually #1 Doubles 58%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
Stephanie Songy
usually #2 Doubles 46%, also #3 Doubles 27% · published
Trollie Estes
usually #2 Doubles 46%, also #3 Doubles 32% · 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.

Diane Matherne + Beth Almond9358% gamesnot enough data
Erin Lorio + Abby Hunt6068% gamesnot enough data
Stephanie Songy + Abby Hunt5062% gamesnot enough data
Erin Lorio + Brooke Brown404 matchesnot enough data
Laura Bonanno + Trollie Estes213 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.

3.5
Abby Hunt
45W–9L career · 24 lines in 2025
<1%14%86%
3.64
3.5
Brooke Brown
28W–6L career · 14 lines in 2025
2%94%3%
3.26
3.5
Erin Lorio
28W–19L career · 25 lines in 2025
5%94%1%
3.22
3.5
Dana Gegenheimer
7W–20L career · type A · 17 lines in 2025
6%93%1%
3.20
Laura Bonanno
26W–18L career · 24 lines in 2025
<1%45%55%
3.02
Molly Burns
40W–22L career · 35 lines in 2025
<1%63%37%
2.96
Kristin Higbee
27W–21L career · 25 lines in 2025
1%93%6%
2.80
3
Jamie Vogel
15W–8L career · 12 lines in 2025
2%94%3%
2.76
3
Beth Almond
21W–18L career · 22 lines in 2025
11%89%<1%
2.66
3
Diane Matherne
18W–24L career · 21 lines in 2025
44%55%<1%
2.52
2.5
Elizabeth Klocek
10W–24L career · 17 lines in 2025
0%>99%<1%
2.10
Joelle Cuevas
34W–34L career · 39 lines in 2025
not enough data
Katherine Gristina
14W–7L career · 12 lines in 2025
not enough data
Laura Lucas
14W–10L career · 12 lines in 2025
not enough data
Stephanie Songy
20W–25L career · 26 lines in 2025
not enough data
Trollie Estes
19W–9L career · 28 lines in 2025
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.