Teams

Apex:Colpitts

2023 Fall Tri-Level · 4.0 Women

6 players · average NTRP 4.00 / MAINE

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2023-11-30vs WOOD:BubbleTrouble:PondWon 10
W#1 DoublesNiamh Colpitts / Holly Steele vs Heidi Allen / Joanna Pond6-4, 6-0
2023-11-12vs Apex:McArdleLost 01
L#1 DoublesOdette Thurston / Lynne Chicoine vs Anne Vaillancourt / Meredith McArdle6-2, 1-6, 1-0
2023-10-27vs Apex:McArdleWon 10
W#1 DoublesNiamh Colpitts / Ann Harradon vs Meredith McArdle / Anne Vaillancourt7-6, 6-2
2023-10-20vs Apex:DoyleWon 10
W#1 DoublesNiamh Colpitts / Ann Harradon vs Diana Doyle / Sandy Manley4-6, 6-3, 1-0
2023-10-18vs Apex:DoyleWon 10
W#1 DoublesHolly Steele / Lynne Chicoine vs Diana Doyle / Pauline Smith6-0, 6-0
2023-10-15vs FF:Mao’sters:MaoWon 10
W#1 DoublesJOANNE SULLIVAN / Odette Thurston vs Deanna Mao / Lorraine Fagela6-4, 6-1
2023-10-12vs WOOD:BubbleTrouble:PondLost 01
L#1 DoublesNiamh Colpitts / Ann Harradon vs Susie Coughlin / Joanna Pond4-6, 1-6
2023-09-30vs FF:Mao’sters:MaoLost 01
L#1 DoublesJOANNE SULLIVAN / Odette Thurston vs Polly Colvin MacKenzie / Deanna Mao3-6, 6-1, 0-1
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 standings9 teams · 4.0 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Apex:Konieczko6363772
2ACOPI:TryHarder:Holm6363776
3Apex:Colpitts5353754
4WOOD:BubbleTrouble:Pond5353766
5FF:Mao’sters:Mao5353861
6Apex:McArdle5353970
7Apex:Marroquin54541073
8Apex:DoubleTrouble:Kapothanasis18181696
9Apex:Doyle08081697

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 3.71 estimated across 2 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.

Ann Harradon
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
JOANNE SULLIVAN
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.72
Niamh Colpitts
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.69
Holly Steele
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
Lynne Chicoine
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Odette Thurston
usually #1 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.

Niamh Colpitts + Ann Harradon7849% games−3.9% vs expected
Holly Steele + Ann Harradon404 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
Ann Harradon
79W–30L career · 3 lines in 2023
not enough data
4
JOANNE SULLIVAN
4W–3L career · 2 lines in 2023
not enough data
Niamh Colpitts
49W–41L career · 4 lines in 2023
4%94%2%
3.72
4
Holly Steele
51W–34L career · 2 lines in 2023
7%92%1%
3.69
Lynne Chicoine
39W–20L career · 2 lines in 2023
not enough data
Odette Thurston
23W–16L career · 3 lines in 2023
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.