Teams

Belmont- Sherdel

2024 Richmond Combo Weekend · Richmond Combo Weekend 6.5 Women

12 players · average NTRP / VIRGINIA

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
2024-09-15vs Westwood Anthony/SommardahlWon 10
W#1 DoublesMary Church / Susan Staton vs Elizabeth Keith / Penny Lowrey7-5, 6-5
2024-09-07vs RMC - SweeneyLost 01
L#2 DoublesMary Church / Linda Benson vs Kimberly Garrett / Alison Spelbring6-3, 6-7, 0-1
2024-08-15vs ACAC Jones 6.5 ComboLost 02
L#1 DoublesMary Church / Heather Scott vs Lori Strobl / Barbara Kasten2-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesDonna Moore / Susan Staton vs Anne Townsend / Rebecca Cassilly4-6, 0-6
2024-08-04vs ACAC Hoefer/KrebsWon 10
W#2 DoublesMary Church / Judith McGarrity vs Alice Albright / Denise Weisberg6-3, 4-6, 1-0
2024-07-27vs Westwood Caudill/DeanLost 01
L#1 DoublesStacy Sherdel / Susan Staton vs Jordan Harper / Hayley Herrin1-6, 2-6
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 Richmond Combo Weekend 6.5 Women 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 2.89 estimated across 11 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.

3.32
Rashelle Hayes
published
3.28
Windy Campbell
published
3.27
Mary Church
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
2.85
Judith McGarrity
published
2.79
Heather Scott
published
2.78
Linda Benson
published
2.78
Susan Staton
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
2.72
Stacy Sherdel
published
2.69
Tina Carter
published
2.65
Shivani Jain
published
2.65
Ruth Bates
published
Donna Moore
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.

Susan Staton + Heather Scott4151% games+4.4% vs expected
Susan Staton + Mary Church6849% gamesnot enough data
Stacy Sherdel + Heather Scott134 matchesnot enough data
Judith McGarrity + Shivani Jain213 matchesnot enough data
Linda Benson + Heather Scott213 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.

Rashelle Hayes
13W–9L career · no lines in 2024
1%89%10%
3.32
Windy Campbell
4W–17L career · no lines in 2024
2%92%6%
3.28
Mary Church
175W–128L career · 4 lines in 2024
3%92%5%
3.27
Judith McGarrity
6W–13L career · no lines in 2024
1%86%13%
2.85
Heather Scott
24W–37L career · no lines in 2024
2%92%6%
2.79
Linda Benson
7W–13L career · no lines in 2024
94%6%<1%
2.78
Susan Staton
130W–142L career · 3 lines in 2024
2%92%5%
2.78
Stacy Sherdel
16W–43L career · no lines in 2024
6%92%2%
2.72
Tina Carter
15W–17L career · no lines in 2024
8%90%1%
2.69
Shivani Jain
4W–18L career · no lines in 2024
15%85%1%
2.65
Ruth Bates
7W–21L career · no lines in 2024
15%85%1%
2.65
Donna Moore
0W–2L career · no lines in 2024
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.