Teams

Millette 7.5 Mixed Combo

2022 Frederick Combo Mixed · Frederick Combo Mixed 7.5

14 players · average NTRP 3.64 / MARYLAND

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
2022-04-25vs Gordon 7.5 Mixed ComboLost 01
L#2 DoublesPhillip Harvin / Cora Ho vs Bryan Necciai / Cintya Leveque2-6, 6-3, 1-0
2022-04-09Won 10
W#3 DoublesPhillip Harvin / Elona Novitski vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2022-04-03vs Gordon 7.5 Mixed ComboLost 01
L#1 DoublesSuzanne Krudys / Brian Lynk vs Maria Woolpert / Emad Nekoo1-6, 0-6
2022-03-28vs Seoul Mates 7.5Lost 01
L#2 DoublesDonna Jones / Phillip Harvin vs John Lee / Jennie Kim4-6, 1-6
2022-03-27vs Dolan 7.5 Mixed ComboWon 10
W#1 DoublesMike James / Suzanne Krudys vs Mesanie Lee / Chris Cocca6-2, 7-6
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 Frederick Combo Mixed 7.5 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 3.28 estimated across 11 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.

3.83
Daniel Mansfield
published 4
Elona Novitski
published 4
3.63
James Mellendick
published 4
3.46
Glen Medina
published 4
3.33
Suzanne Krudys
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.28
Cora Ho
published 3.5
3.21
Armando Zamora
published 3.5
3.19
Leslie Mansfield
published
3.15
Phillip Harvin
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 38% · published 3.5
3.11
Giselle Medina
published 3.5
2.97
Donna Jones
published 3
2.95
Brian Lynk
published 3.5
Loan Nguyen
published
Millette Miller
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.

Leslie Mansfield + Daniel Mansfield3352% games+1.7% vs expected
Giselle Medina + Glen Medina213 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
Daniel Mansfield
33W–20L career · no lines in 2022
1%90%10%
3.83
4
Elona Novitski
0W–2L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
4
James Mellendick
1W–4L career · no lines in 2022
17%83%<1%
3.63
4
Glen Medina
84W–132L career · no lines in 2022
63%37%<1%
3.46
3.5
Suzanne Krudys
152W–110L career · 2 lines in 2022
1%90%9%
3.33
3.5
Cora Ho
120W–87L career · no lines in 2022
2%94%5%
3.28
3.5
Armando Zamora
7W–10L career · no lines in 2022
5%93%1%
3.21
Leslie Mansfield
36W–23L career · no lines in 2022
7%92%1%
3.19
3.5
Phillip Harvin
144W–211L career · 8 lines in 2022
12%88%<1%
3.15
3.5
Giselle Medina
28W–27L career · no lines in 2022
20%80%<1%
3.11
3
Donna Jones
21W–22L career · no lines in 2022
<1%58%42%
2.97
3.5
Brian Lynk
0W–6L career · no lines in 2022
65%35%<1%
2.95
Loan Nguyen
0W–3L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Millette Miller
7W–4L 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.