Teams

BCCC Sweet Shote - (Pasic)

2025 Central Penn Ladies Day League · 5.0 Division - Fall

9 players · average NTRP 3.00 / CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2024-11-05vs Hempfield - Woods-KellyWon 10
W#2 DoublesAbby Pasic / Kaitlin Behmer vs Linda Rasmuson / Linda Mullen7-5, 6-2
2024-10-15vs Lancaster CC - Shand / JemisonLost 01
L#2 DoublesKaitlin Behmer / Kaley Miller vs Tara Kinney / Persila Mertz4-6, 1-6
2024-10-02vs Hempfield - Woods-KellyLost 01
L#1 DoublesKaitlin Behmer / Giusy Milazzo Leanza vs Flo Moran / Laura Sisay0-6, 1-6
2024-09-24vs Lancaster CC - Shand / JemisonLost 01
L#1 DoublesKaitlin Behmer / Linda Ray vs Lauren Stadel / Alexandra Shand1-6, 5-7
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 5.0 Division - Fall 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 2.59 estimated across 7 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.

3.10
Maggie Cronin
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.90
Kara Schama
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.75
Kaley Miller
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.43
Madison South
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
2.41
Abby Pasic
usually #2 Doubles 56%, also #1 Doubles 44% · published 3
2.29
Stephanie Hansell
usually #1 Doubles 63%, also #2 Doubles 38% · published
2.24
Giusy Milazzo Leanza
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
Kaitlin Behmer
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
Michele Werder
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.

Maggie Cronin + Kara Schama8269% games+13.9% vs expected
Abby Pasic + Kara Schama3456% games+7.0% vs expected
Abby Pasic + Madison South4545% games+2.7% vs expected
Giusy Milazzo Leanza + Stephanie Hansell224 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
Maggie Cronin
46W–8L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%24%76%
3.10
3
Kara Schama
23W–12L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%75%24%
2.90
Kaley Miller
22W–9L career · 3 lines in 2025
3%93%4%
2.75
Madison South
13W–9L career · 2 lines in 2025
68%32%<1%
2.43
3
Abby Pasic
22W–20L career · type A · 9 lines in 2025
75%25%<1%
2.41
Stephanie Hansell
8W–8L career · 8 lines in 2025
0%94%6%
2.29
Giusy Milazzo Leanza
21W–37L career · 6 lines in 2025
0%97%3%
2.24
Kaitlin Behmer
5W–11L career · 4 lines in 2025
not enough data
Michele Werder
2W–6L career · no 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.