Teams

Netchicks

Fire & Ice 2025 - NA · Fire & Ice 4.5 Division

7 players · average NTRP / TEXAS

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
2025-12-07vs Block PartyWon 21
W#1 DoublesHolly Perry / Robynn Sweet vs Mariela Monagas / Angelica Padilla6-1, 7-6
L#2 DoublesNancy Price / MEGAN SIMANK vs Danielle Spencer / Lauren Villegas1-6, 4-6
W#3 DoublesPam Gandy / Julie Alvarez vs Beverly Rowland / Holly Hayes6-4, 6-3
2025-12-07vs Block PartySplit 11
W#1 DoublesLacey Kohnen / Julie Alvarez vs Lauren Villegas / Danielle Spencer7-5, 6-1
L#3 DoublesRobynn Sweet / Linda Wooster vs Holly Hayes / Stacey Boebel2-6, 6-3, 0-1
2025-12-06vs Block PartyLost 02
L#2 DoublesPam Gandy / Linda Wooster vs Danielle Spencer / Lauren Villegas5-7, 7-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesRobynn Sweet / MEGAN SIMANK vs Stacey Boebel / Holly Hayes1-6, 1-6
2025-12-06vs Block PartyLost 12
W#1 DoublesHolly Perry / Julie Alvarez vs Beverly Rowland / Holly Hayes6-4, 6-1
L#2 DoublesLacey Kohnen / Robynn Sweet vs Lauren Villegas / Danielle Spencer6-4, 3-6, 0-1
L#3 DoublesNancy Price / Pam Gandy vs Virginia Kaklamani / Angelica Padilla7-5, 3-6, 0-1
2025-12-05vs Block PartySplit 11
W#1 DoublesLacey Kohnen / Jessey Martinez vs Danielle Spencer / Stacey Boebel6-1, 6-3
L#3 DoublesJulie Alvarez / MEGAN SIMANK vs Beverly Rowland / Holly Hayes2-6, 4-6
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 Fire & Ice 4.5 Division 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 4.28 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.

4.68
Julie Alvarez
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
4.43
Lacey Kohnen
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
4.30
Jessey Martinez
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
4.15
Linda Wooster
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
4.12
Robynn Sweet
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
4.00
Pam Gandy
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
MEGAN SIMANK
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · 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.

Julie Alvarez + Lacey Kohnen5166% games+2.4% vs expected
Linda Wooster + Pam Gandy4647% games−7.7% vs expected
Jessey Martinez + Lacey Kohnen224 matchesnot enough data
Pam Gandy + Julie Alvarez303 matchesnot enough data
Robynn Sweet + Lacey Kohnen213 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.

Julie Alvarez
22W–10L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%10%90%
4.68
Lacey Kohnen
16W–9L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%68%32%
4.43
Jessey Martinez
20W–15L career · 1 line in 2025
2%91%8%
4.30
Linda Wooster
9W–9L career · 2 lines in 2025
14%86%1%
4.15
Robynn Sweet
4W–5L career · 4 lines in 2025
19%80%<1%
4.12
Pam Gandy
12W–15L career · 3 lines in 2025
49%51%<1%
4.00
MEGAN SIMANK
0W–4L career · 3 lines 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.