Teams

Capobianco CFCC

2025 South East Tennis Singles 18 & Over League · 3.5 Women 18 & Over

8 players · average NTRP 3.25 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2025-02-26vs Waddle 3.5 SinglesSplit 11
W#2 SinglesSarah Beth Deans vs Heather Weddle3-6, 6-4, 1-0
L#3 SinglesKimberly Shipley vs Meghan McKeithan6-2, 4-6, 0-1
2025-02-17vs Nerell SeidelLost 02
L#1 SinglesLorien Lamar vs Madison Seidel4-6, 2-6
L#2 SinglesDenise Lopatka vs Kelly Nerell2-6, 7-6, 0-1
2025-02-08vs BrandkampLost 02
L#2 SinglesKimberly Shipley vs Amy Messier3-6, 2-6
L#3 SinglesHayden Kirby vs Stephanie Farrell2-6, 1-6
2025-01-29vs Waddle 3.5 SinglesLost 03
L#1 SinglesSarah McLamb vs Katie Greene1-6, 1-6
L#2 SinglesKelly Capobianco vs Maddie Crumpton6-3, 6-7, 0-1
L#3 SinglesKimberly Shipley vs Molly Hanly5-7, 6-1, 0-1
2025-01-25vs Nerell SeidelWon 30
W#1 SinglesKristine Janik vs Corinne Monahan7-5, 3-6, 1-0
W#2 SinglesKelly Capobianco vs Kelly Nerell6-4, 6-3
W#3 SinglesHayden Kirby vs Christine Pratt6-2, 5-7, 1-0
2025-01-13vs BrandkampWon 30
W#1 SinglesLorien Lamar vs Stephanie Farrell6-1, 6-2
W#2 SinglesSarah McLamb vs Leigh Burris6-3, 7-5
W#3 SinglesDenise Lopatka vs Kathleen Graeser6-3, 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 standings for 3.5 Women 18 & Over 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 3.23 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.

3.40
Kristine Janik
usually #1 Singles 100% · published
3.40
Denise Lopatka
usually #2 Singles 50%, also #3 Singles 50% · published 3.5
3.35
Kelly Capobianco
usually #2 Singles 100% · published
3.28
Sarah Beth Deans
usually #2 Singles 100% · published
3.06
Sarah McLamb
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #2 Singles 50% · published
2.88
Hayden Kirby
usually #3 Singles 100% · published 3
Kimberly Shipley
usually #3 Singles 67%, also #2 Singles 33% · published
Lorien Lamar
usually #1 Singles 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.

Denise Lopatka + Hayden Kirby5256% games+5.8% vs expected
Kristine Janik + Kelly Capobianco123 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.

Kristine Janik
20W–20L career · 1 line in 2025
77%23%<1%
3.40
3.5
Denise Lopatka
27W–13L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%79%21%
3.40
Kelly Capobianco
25W–23L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%88%12%
3.35
Sarah Beth Deans
13W–8L career · 1 line in 2025
2%94%4%
3.28
Sarah McLamb
12W–11L career · 2 lines in 2025
32%68%<1%
3.06
3
Hayden Kirby
21W–13L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%83%17%
2.88
Kimberly Shipley
5W–5L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
Lorien Lamar
5W–5L career · 2 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.