Teams

Netchix Tri

Adult Tri-Level League · Tri Level Womens 3.0-4.0 Wednesday

8 players · average NTRP 3.60 / PHILADELPHIA

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 →
Flight standings20 teams · Tri Level Womens 3.0-4.0 Wednesday
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Three bees000000
2Netchix Tri000000
3KSGCC Triple Threat000000
4KSGCC Bottoms Up000000
5Ladies of the Dam 1000000
6Overbrook Aces000000
7Nic Tri000000
8Tri-Aces000000
9DVTA Triple Threat000000
10Idle Shots000000
11Cynwyd Court Couture000000
12Llanerch000000
13Philadelphia Cricket Red000000
14Tri-Slice000000
15Legacy Tri-fectas000000
16Frogettes000000
17Tri One Love000000
18HVCC Bulls000000
19Ladies of the Dam 2000000
20Philadelphia Cricket Blue000000

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 3.30 estimated across 7 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.

Danielle Turner
published 4
3.70
Rita Hutton
published
3.56
Jen Penwell
published 4
3.44
Sarah Kulik
published 3.5
3.44
Leslie Brinkley
published 3.5
3.02
Katharine Quigley
published
2.99
Paige Jankowski
published 3
2.94
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.

Katharine Quigley + Leslie Brinkley13461% games+10.6% vs expected
Jen Penwell + Sarah Kulik5069% 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.

4
Danielle Turner
65W–40L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
Rita Hutton
59W–81L career · no lines in 2026
7%91%2%
3.70
4
Jen Penwell
186W–76L career · no lines in 2026
34%66%<1%
3.56
3.5
Sarah Kulik
85W–23L career · no lines in 2026
<1%67%33%
3.44
3.5
Leslie Brinkley
56W–21L career · no lines in 2026
<1%68%32%
3.44
Katharine Quigley
46W–26L career · no lines in 2026
<1%45%55%
3.02
3
Paige Jankowski
52W–22L career · no lines in 2026
<1%54%46%
2.99
Ekaterina Khudiakova
8W–1L career · no lines in 2026
<1%68%32%
2.94

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.