Teams

Hills - HCC Team Banger Sisters/Means

2022 Hillsborough Adult 40 & Over · 4.5 Adult 40 & Over - Women

10 players · average NTRP 4.50 / REGION_3

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2022-05-14vs HCC - HansenWon 10
W#3 DoublesMeredith Mueller / Judi Alford vs Jillene Davis / Michele Ironsmith7-5, 3-6, 1-0
2022-05-07vs Plant City - Perfectly MatchedWon 20
W#1 DoublesStephanie Means / Judi Alford vs Jennifer Myers / Sonia Patrick6-3, 6-1
W#3 DoublesDebra Stump / Christina Dorothy vs Maria-Claudia Herrera / Stephanie Geshel6-2, 3-6, 1-0
2022-04-30vs HCC - F. AldeenWon 10
W#1 DoublesMollie Simpson / Judi Alford vs Elaine Aschenbrenner / Donna Parimore6-2, 6-1
2022-04-23vs HCC - HansenLost 01
L#3 DoublesJudi Alford / Stephanie Means vs Jillene Davis / Stephanie Wager1-6, 7-5, 0-1
2022-04-16vs Plant City - Perfectly MatchedLost 01
L#3 DoublesTracey Williams / Christina Dorothy vs Sonia Patrick / Jennifer Myers6-7, 2-6
2022-04-09vs HCC - F. AldeenWon 10
W#1 DoublesMaki Smith / Meredith Mueller vs Tish Wissel / Uyen Tran6-2, 6-0
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 4.5 Adult 40 & Over - 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 4.26 estimated across 9 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.

4.49
Mollie Simpson
published
4.36
Stephanie Means
published
4.35
Karen MacCormack
published 4.5
4.31
Margaret Roset
published
4.31
Judi Alford
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 4.5
4.27
Lisa Haidermota
published
4.20
Christina Dorothy
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
4.07
Maki Smith
published
4.02
Meredith Mueller
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
Katie Nistad
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.

Christina Dorothy + Karen MacCormack4155% gamesnot 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.

Mollie Simpson
3W–0L career · no lines in 2022
<1%53%47%
4.49
Stephanie Means
13W–5L career · no lines in 2022
<1%86%13%
4.36
4.5
Karen MacCormack
23W–21L career · no lines in 2022
<1%88%12%
4.35
Margaret Roset
8W–6L career · no lines in 2022
1%92%7%
4.31
4.5
Judi Alford
89W–31L career · 4 lines in 2022
1%92%7%
4.31
Lisa Haidermota
4W–6L career · no lines in 2022
2%94%4%
4.27
4.5
Christina Dorothy
134W–85L career · 2 lines in 2022
7%92%1%
4.20
Maki Smith
4W–1L career · no lines in 2022
31%69%<1%
4.07
Meredith Mueller
65W–28L career · 2 lines in 2022
44%55%<1%
4.02
Katie Nistad
2W–3L 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.