Teams

MPTC - Stryke Force

*2023 Houston Fall League (2022) NA - Tuesday Ladies Doubles · 4.5 Ladies

20 players · average NTRP 4.30 / TEXAS

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 4.5 Ladies 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 4.01 estimated across 10 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.

4.31
Melissa Stryker
published
Angela Bowers
published 4.5
4.18
Paige Hagle
published
4.10
Mary Volf
published
4.10
Sarah Pletcher
published
4.07
Gina Hughes
published 4.5
4.07
Sara Wilks
published
3.94
Amy Munger
published 4.5
3.90
Marian Hilpert
published
3.82
Amy Markwort
published 4
3.56
Christina Zhou
published
Jennifer Ray
published
Jill Karlgaard
published
Kelly Labanowski
published
Lauren Cox
published
Laurie Dorfman
published
Lisa Cohen
published
Patricia Buchanan
published
Valerie Volpi
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.

Valerie Volpi + Marian Hilpert10265% games+7.3% vs expected
Amy Munger + Melissa Stryker15263% games+2.7% vs expected
Melissa Stryker + Paige Hagle16159% games+1.2% vs expected
Mary Volf + Marian Hilpert4261% games−1.1% vs expected
Mary Volf + Paige Hagle2450% games−4.1% vs expected
Jill Karlgaard + Paige Hagle314 matchesnot enough data
Lisa Cohen + Paige Hagle213 matchesnot enough data
Mary Volf + Jill Karlgaard303 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.

Melissa Stryker
72W–25L career · no lines in 2023
1%92%7%
4.31
4.5
Angela Bowers
1W–8L career · type S · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Paige Hagle
40W–17L career · no lines in 2023
9%91%1%
4.18
Mary Volf
56W–29L career · no lines in 2023
22%78%<1%
4.10
Sarah Pletcher
12W–10L career · no lines in 2023
22%78%<1%
4.10
4.5
Gina Hughes
6W–8L career · no lines in 2023
29%71%<1%
4.07
Sara Wilks
38W–17L career · no lines in 2023
29%71%<1%
4.07
4.5
Amy Munger
16W–4L career · type S · no lines in 2023
69%31%<1%
3.94
Marian Hilpert
34W–17L career · no lines in 2023
77%23%<1%
3.90
4
Amy Markwort
22W–14L career · no lines in 2023
1%91%8%
3.82
4
CRISTIN DICKERSON
2W–5L career · type S · no lines in 2023
32%68%<1%
3.56
Christina Zhou
3W–3L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Jennifer Ray
22W–35L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Jill Karlgaard
15W–6L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Kelly Labanowski
3W–2L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Lauren Cox
1W–4L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Laurie Dorfman
8W–20L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Lisa Cohen
3W–4L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Patricia Buchanan
4W–7L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Valerie Volpi
16W–4L career · no 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.