Teams

PMP

2021 Anne Arundel Adult 40 & Over · Adult 40 & Over Women 3.5

17 players · average NTRP 3.27 / MARYLAND

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 standings for Adult 40 & Over Women 3.5 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 3.10 estimated across 15 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.

3.46
Claris Brock
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.42
Cynthia Rapp
published 3.5
3.38
Karen Francis
published
3.29
Natasha Rones
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.27
Andaiye Hamilton
usually #2 Doubles 38%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.22
3.17
Shirin Ahmed
usually #3 Doubles 80%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published 3.5
3.14
Ingrid Turner
published 3.5
3.10
Tinya Coles-Cieply
usually #3 Doubles 60%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
2.97
Donna Jones
published 3
2.95
Rachele Stines
usually #1 Singles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.81
Deana Stamper
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.79
Lenora Spencer
usually #3 Doubles 71%, also #1 Doubles 14% · published 3
Donna Garland
published 3
2.74
Bobbie Garrison
published 3
2.74
Emily Barry
published 3
Valerie Pierce
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.

Andaiye Hamilton + Natasha Rones241653% games−2.1% vs expected
Rachele Stines + Lenora Spencer14951% games−4.9% vs expected
Tinya Coles-Cieply + Lenora Spencer8260% gamesnot enough data
Tinya Coles-Cieply + Andaiye Hamilton5265% gamesnot enough data
Shirin Ahmed + Lenora Spencer5258% gamesnot enough data
Claris Brock + Natasha Rones224 matchesnot enough data
Claris Brock + Andaiye Hamilton303 matchesnot enough data
Claris Brock + Karen Francis303 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.

3.5
Claris Brock
420W–275L career · 3 lines in 2021
<1%63%37%
3.46
3.5
Cynthia Rapp
36W–30L career · no lines in 2021
<1%73%27%
3.42
Karen Francis
57W–66L career · no lines in 2021
<1%82%18%
3.38
3.5
Natasha Rones
212W–124L career · 6 lines in 2021
1%94%5%
3.29
3.5
Andaiye Hamilton
305W–151L career · 8 lines in 2021
2%94%4%
3.27
3.5
Denise Martin Barnes
0W–4L career · no lines in 2021
4%94%2%
3.22
3.5
Shirin Ahmed
198W–134L career · 5 lines in 2021
9%90%1%
3.17
3.5
Ingrid Turner
6W–3L career · no lines in 2021
14%86%<1%
3.14
3.5
Tinya Coles-Cieply
79W–75L career · 5 lines in 2021
23%77%<1%
3.10
3
Donna Jones
21W–22L career · no lines in 2021
<1%58%42%
2.97
3
Rachele Stines
165W–138L career · 3 lines in 2021
<1%65%35%
2.95
3
Deana Stamper
69W–70L career · type A · 2 lines in 2021
1%92%7%
2.81
3
Lenora Spencer
300W–174L career · 7 lines in 2021
1%93%6%
2.79
3
Donna Garland
1W–5L career · no lines in 2021
not enough data
3
Bobbie Garrison
7W–11L career · no lines in 2021
3%94%2%
2.74
3
Emily Barry
15W–19L career · no lines in 2021
3%94%2%
2.74
Valerie Pierce
0W–1L career · no lines in 2021
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.