Teams

Hunter - NYCC

2024 Norfolk Combo · Norfolk Combo 6.5 Women

12 players · average NTRP 3.50 / VIRGINIA

View scouting list →
Schedule3 played
2024-10-14vs Cowen - Cowan/HoffmanWon 10
W#2 DoublesKathryn Fraim / Carrie Coleman vs Christine Cowen / Linda Randall6-1, 6-0
2024-10-07vs Cowen - Cowan/HoffmanWon 10
W#3 DoublesRebecca Hoover / Kathryn Fraim vs Christine Cowen / Julie Soriano6-2, 6-4
2024-09-23vs Cowen - Cowan/HoffmanWon 10
W#2 DoublesKathryn Fraim / Carrie Coleman vs Rebecca Newton / Christine Cowen6-4, 6-2
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 Norfolk Combo 6.5 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 3.15 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.

3.98
Tessa Robinson
published
3.56
Kelsey Sarcone
published
3.35
Kathryn Fraim
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.35
Rebecca Hoover
published
3.29
Carrie Coleman
published 3.5
3.09
Karla Smith
published
3.08
Rachel Mullet-Cline
published
3.04
Kimberly Havener
published
2.93
Kathryn Kramer
published
2.81
Missy Callahan
published
2.70
Sarah Weinberg
published
2.63
Polly Gellman
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.

Carrie Coleman + Kathryn Fraim11655% games+3.0% vs expected
Kimberly Havener + Rachel Mullet-Cline2553% games+2.1% vs expected
Kelsey Sarcone + Rebecca Hoover6356% games−4.7% vs expected
Sarah Weinberg + Polly Gellman2440% games−14.2% vs expected
Karla Smith + Rachel Mullet-Cline134 matchesnot enough data
Rachel Mullet-Cline + Kathryn Kramer224 matchesnot enough data
Sarah Weinberg + Missy Callahan123 matchesnot enough data
Missy Callahan + Kimberly Havener213 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.

Tessa Robinson
12W–7L career · no lines in 2024
<1%56%44%
3.98
Kelsey Sarcone
18W–8L career · no lines in 2024
<1%34%66%
3.56
3.5
Kathryn Fraim
72W–55L career · 3 lines in 2024
1%85%14%
3.35
Rebecca Hoover
12W–14L career · no lines in 2024
1%85%14%
3.35
3.5
Carrie Coleman
15W–10L career · no lines in 2024
2%91%7%
3.29
Karla Smith
3W–11L career · no lines in 2024
25%74%<1%
3.09
Rachel Mullet-Cline
20W–15L career · no lines in 2024
<1%29%71%
3.08
Kimberly Havener
17W–18L career · no lines in 2024
<1%39%61%
3.04
Kathryn Kramer
23W–14L career · no lines in 2024
<1%68%32%
2.93
Missy Callahan
4W–9L career · no lines in 2024
1%90%9%
2.81
Sarah Weinberg
5W–15L career · no lines in 2024
7%91%2%
2.70
Polly Gellman
8W–12L career · no lines in 2024
18%82%<1%
2.63

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.