Teams

QRRC Burkle

2025 OH OV WINTER 18&O Mixed · Winter 18&O 8.0MXD

18 players · average NTRP 4.00 / OHIO VALLEY

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 →
Schedule8 played
2025-05-09vs KTC ShivelyWon 10
W#3 DoublesKatie McCall / SCOTT WELDE vs Louisette Abikou / Nicholas Quiroz6-2, 6-7, 1-0
2025-04-12vs FSSC AndersonWon 20
W#1 DoublesKatie McCall / Nathan Fullington vs Zach Clendenen / Lisa Yates7-6, 6-3
W#2 DoublesBecky Dye / Gopal Bhat vs Conrad Klank / Kelsey Schuering3-6, 6-3, 1-0
2025-04-11vs SRTC SchlaterWon 10
W#1 DoublesKatie McCall / Dane Ranney vs Carol Poe / David Ehlers3-6, 6-3, 1-0
2025-04-06Lost 01
L#2 DoublesVeronica Smallwood / Nathan Fullington vs Jason Merkle / Georgianne Lowman3-6, 6-7
2025-03-30vs SRTC SchlaterWon 20
W#1 DoublesBecky Dye / Dane Ranney vs Tammy Figueroa / Chris Schlater6-2, 7-5
W#2 DoublesVeronica Smallwood / Nathan Fullington vs Kathe Mullins / Rajeev Goel5-7, 7-5, 1-0
2025-02-28vs QRRC StevensSplit 11
W#1 DoublesVeronica Smallwood / Nathan Fullington vs Elizabeth Hann / Steven Jain6-1, 6-2
L#3 DoublesKyle Webb / Katie McCall vs Rachael Avers / Jacob Loeffelholz5-7, 6-4, 0-1
2025-02-22Lost 01
L#3 DoublesMichael Kerschbaum / Mai Kerschbaum vs Jenna Hagood / Cory Natoli1-6, 5-7
2025-01-25vs KTC BeiersdorferSplit 11
L#1 DoublesDane Ranney / Eva Siler vs Luke Trubee / Sidney Purks2-6, 1-6
W#2 DoublesGopal Bhat / JACLYN STUBBS vs Robert Rittwage / Jessica Haney6-3, 6-3
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 standings6 teams · Winter 18&O 8.0MXD
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1KTC Beiersdorfer9126412209
2KTC Shively8222820238
3QRRC Burkle46161433272
4SRTC Schlater37102044316
5FSSC Anderson3782246327
6QRRC Stevens3782248323

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 3.76 estimated across 13 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.

Elizabeth Schaefer
published 4.5
4.01
Christine Burkle
usually #1 Doubles 80%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published 4
3.96
Becky Dye
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.96
Veronica Smallwood
usually #2 Doubles 80%, also #1 Doubles 20% · published
3.90
Gopal Bhat
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.84
Lunilia Crespo
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.81
SCOTT WELDE
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
3.77
Nathan Fullington
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.76
Dane Ranney
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 17% · published 4
Eva Siler
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.72
Katie McCall
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
3.72
JACLYN STUBBS
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.61
Carter Tisdale
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.46
Kyle Webb
usually #3 Doubles 63%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
3.36
Clayton Burkle
usually #3 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
Jennifer Lake
published
Mai Kerschbaum
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Michael Kerschbaum
usually #3 Doubles 100% · 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.

Nathan Fullington + Veronica Smallwood5159% games+11.2% vs expected
Christine Burkle + Clayton Burkle14756% games+2.6% vs expected
Gopal Bhat + Becky Dye7055% games−2.8% vs expected
Gopal Bhat + Christine Burkle8456% games−5.2% vs expected
Clayton Burkle + Becky Dye7066% gamesnot enough data
Kyle Webb + Lunilia Crespo134 matchesnot enough data
SCOTT WELDE + Veronica Smallwood213 matchesnot enough data
Kyle Webb + Elizabeth Schaefer213 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.

4.5
Elizabeth Schaefer
23W–13L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
4
Christine Burkle
237W–119L career · 5 lines in 2025
<1%46%54%
4.01
4
Becky Dye
218W–63L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%61%39%
3.96
Veronica Smallwood
164W–32L career · 10 lines in 2025
<1%62%38%
3.96
4
Gopal Bhat
130W–69L career · 8 lines in 2025
<1%77%23%
3.90
Lunilia Crespo
207W–106L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%89%11%
3.84
SCOTT WELDE
99W–99L career · 8 lines in 2025
1%92%7%
3.81
Nathan Fullington
51W–36L career · 4 lines in 2025
2%94%4%
3.77
4
Dane Ranney
66W–56L career · 6 lines in 2025
2%94%3%
3.76
4
Eva Siler
3W–4L career · 1 line in 2025
not enough data
Katie McCall
52W–48L career · 4 lines in 2025
4%94%2%
3.72
4
JACLYN STUBBS
90W–75L career · 1 line in 2025
5%94%2%
3.72
4
Carter Tisdale
17W–11L career · 8 lines in 2025
20%80%<1%
3.61
Kyle Webb
186W–114L career · 8 lines in 2025
<1%62%38%
3.46
3.5
Clayton Burkle
114W–82L career · 5 lines in 2025
<1%85%14%
3.36
Jennifer Lake
17W–8L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Mai Kerschbaum
4W–1L career · 1 line in 2025
not enough data
Michael Kerschbaum
0W–3L career · 1 line 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.