Teams

SATA/Ericka Stevens

2024 · 2025 SATA USTA Adult 18 & Over (Women) - Fall

9 players · average NTRP 2.67 / GEORGIA

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2024-11-20vs BP-WeedenWon 10
W#2 DoublesEmma Wanamaker / Britany Beckman vs Megan Trenaman / Alyssa Trenaman6-0, 7-6
2024-10-23vs BP-WeedenWon 20
W#1 DoublesChelsea Price / Britany Beckman vs Sandra Gomo / Katie Jones6-2, 6-3
W#1 SinglesJenna Smith vs Molly Hatch6-4, 6-2
2024-10-02vs BP-Perez/FoleyWon 20
W#1 SinglesJenna Smith vs Wynter Foley6-0, 6-0
W#2 DoublesErica H / Caroline Day vs Shannon Gross / Sing Ku6-2, 6-0
2024-09-23vs BP-WeedenWon 10
W#2 DoublesCaroline Day / Britany Beckman vs Kaley Boyles / DeBria Robinson6-3, 6-1
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 standings4 teams · 2025 SATA USTA Adult 18 & Over (Women) - Fall
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1SATA/Ericka Stevens90243698
2BP-Perez/Foley45131430234
3BP-Weeden45111635267
4BP-Taylor1862143281

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 2.65 estimated across 6 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.

2.87
Soyon Lim
usually #1 Singles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
2.76
Jenna Smith
usually #1 Singles 100% · published
2.70
Chelsea Price
usually #1 Doubles 43%, also #1 Singles 29% · published 3
2.59
Lisa Martineau
usually #1 Doubles 36%, also #1 Singles 27% · published
2.50
Karla Tuten
usually #3 Doubles 43%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published
2.44
Nicole LaWare
usually #3 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 27% · published
Britany Beckman
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 2.5
Emma Wanamaker
usually #2 Doubles 43%, also #3 Doubles 43% · published 2.5
Erica H
usually #2 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.

Lisa Martineau + Soyon Lim033 matchesnot enough data
Karla Tuten + Emma Wanamaker123 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.

Soyon Lim
37W–34L career · 9 lines in 2025
<1%83%17%
2.87
Jenna Smith
8W–5L career · 2 lines in 2025
0%2%98%
2.76
3
Chelsea Price
18W–47L career · 7 lines in 2025
6%93%1%
2.70
Lisa Martineau
14W–38L career · 11 lines in 2025
24%76%<1%
2.59
Karla Tuten
16W–16L career · 7 lines in 2025
50%50%<1%
2.50
Nicole LaWare
15W–44L career · 15 lines in 2025
68%32%<1%
2.44
2.5
Britany Beckman
3W–0L career · type S · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
2.5
Emma Wanamaker
5W–9L career · 7 lines in 2025
not enough data
Erica H
11W–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.