Teams

City of Winter Haven/Edwards

2026 Polk (NA) Casual League · 4.0 Plus

15 players · average NTRP 3.81 / REGION_4

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 →
Schedule11 upcoming
Sep 8 9:30 AM
Lakeland Tennis Courts
Sep 15 9:30 AM
Winter Haven City Tennis Center
Sep 22 9:30 AM
Kelly Recreation Complex
Sep 29 9:30 AM
Winter Haven City Tennis Center
Oct 6 9:30 AM
Lakeland Tennis Courts
Oct 13 9:30 AM
Winter Haven City Tennis Center
Oct 20 9:30 AM
Winter Haven City Tennis Center
Oct 27 9:30 AM
Winter Haven City Tennis Center
Nov 3 9:30 AM
Lakeland Tennis Courts
Nov 10 9:30 AM
Winter Haven City Tennis Center
Nov 17 9:30 AM
Kelly Recreation Complex
Flight standings4 teams · 4.0 Plus
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Beerman Smart Aces/Giusto000000
2City of Winter Haven/Edwards000000
3Beerman/Choe-Simmons000000
4Beerman/Maqueira000000

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 3.51 estimated across 14 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.

3.87
Meagan McGill
published 4
3.85
Jennifer Myers
published
3.72
3.66
Cathy Robichaux
published 4
3.63
Lindsay Mahler
published
3.58
Denise Saltman
published 4
3.56
Rebecca Pate
published
3.52
Christina Paine
published 4
3.52
Kim Knapp
published
3.38
Kathy Borders
published 3.5
3.38
Susan McGill
published
3.23
Jackie Edwards
published
3.15
Allison Sorenson
published 3.5
3.12
Nathaly Arredondo
published 3.5
Sharon Lockwood
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.

Meagan McGill + Susan McGill3258% games+3.4% vs expected
Arabia Brakefield + Denise Saltman101549% games+1.6% vs expected
Arabia Brakefield + Meagan McGill421562% games+1.2% vs expected
Allison Sorenson + Nathaly Arredondo314 matchesnot enough data
Rebecca Pate + Jackie Edwards123 matchesnot enough data
Rebecca Pate + Denise Saltman033 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
Meagan McGill
120W–78L career · no lines in 2026
<1%82%18%
3.87
Jennifer Myers
60W–71L career · no lines in 2026
85%15%<1%
3.85
4
Arabia Brakefield
164W–119L career · no lines in 2026
6%92%2%
3.72
4
Cathy Robichaux
1W–2L career · no lines in 2026
13%86%1%
3.66
Lindsay Mahler
20W–25L career · no lines in 2026
18%81%<1%
3.63
4
Denise Saltman
159W–134L career · no lines in 2026
29%71%<1%
3.58
Rebecca Pate
21W–32L career · no lines in 2026
34%65%<1%
3.56
4
Christina Paine
2W–5L career · no lines in 2026
46%54%<1%
3.52
Kim Knapp
8W–12L career · no lines in 2026
46%54%<1%
3.52
3.5
Kathy Borders
109W–75L career · no lines in 2026
<1%80%20%
3.38
Susan McGill
14W–20L career · no lines in 2026
<1%80%19%
3.38
Jackie Edwards
5W–10L career · no lines in 2026
97%3%<1%
3.23
3.5
Allison Sorenson
96W–39L career · no lines in 2026
14%85%1%
3.15
3.5
Nathaly Arredondo
78W–70L career · no lines in 2026
19%80%<1%
3.12
Sharon Lockwood
1W–1L career · no lines in 2026
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.