Teams

Mays 4.5 18+ Wed AM

2023 Piedmont USTA 18 & Over · WOMEN 4.5 18 & Over

12 players · average NTRP 4.07 / NORTH CAROLINA

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 →
Schedule5 played
2023-05-03vs Egerton 4.5 18 WedWon 10
W#1 DoublesWhitney Ellis / Alison Crews vs Catherine Egerton / Michele Alvarino6-3, 6-2
2023-04-26vs Egerton 4.5 18 WedLost 01
L#1 DoublesAlison Crews / Whitney Ellis vs Sue English / Sara Strasser7-5, 4-6, 0-1
2023-04-05vs Egerton 4.5 18 WedWon 10
W#1 DoublesBridget Gislimberti / Alison Crews vs Blair Churchill / Erin Richardson6-2, 6-4
2023-03-29vs Egerton 4.5 18 WedWon 10
W#1 DoublesSherman Covington / Alison Crews vs Sue English / Catherine Egerton7-5, 6-0
2023-03-15vs Egerton 4.5 18 WedWon 10
W#1 DoublesElizabeth Gill / Alison Crews vs Blair Churchill / Michele Alvarino6-1, 6-2
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 WOMEN 4.5 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 3.87 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.

4.30
Elizabeth Gill
published 4.5
4.06
4.05
Alison Crews
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.97
Heather Parr
published 4
3.94
Whitney Ellis
published
3.80
Sherman Covington
published
3.76
Catherine Stopka
published 4
3.73
Catherine Tanner
published 4
3.68
Felicia Price
published 4
3.65
Tracy Harlan
published
3.63
Jennifer Mays
published
LAISBETH HIGUEREY
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.

Jennifer Mays + Bridget Gislimberti241259% games+9.6% vs expected
Tracy Harlan + Catherine Tanner3346% games−8.6% vs expected
Tracy Harlan + Heather Parr224 matchesnot enough data
Tracy Harlan + Sherman Covington213 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.

4.5
Elizabeth Gill
23W–10L career · no lines in 2023
1%92%7%
4.30
4
Bridget Gislimberti
45W–23L career · no lines in 2023
<1%33%67%
4.06
4
Alison Crews
113W–61L career · type A · 5 lines in 2023
<1%36%64%
4.05
4
Heather Parr
40W–16L career · no lines in 2023
<1%60%40%
3.97
Whitney Ellis
49W–28L career · no lines in 2023
<1%67%33%
3.94
Sherman Covington
14W–4L career · no lines in 2023
1%93%6%
3.80
4
Catherine Stopka
10W–17L career · no lines in 2023
2%95%3%
3.76
4
Catherine Tanner
41W–39L career · no lines in 2023
4%94%2%
3.73
4
Felicia Price
7W–2L career · no lines in 2023
8%91%1%
3.68
Tracy Harlan
23W–22L career · no lines in 2023
12%87%<1%
3.65
Jennifer Mays
70W–42L career · no lines in 2023
16%84%<1%
3.63
LAISBETH HIGUEREY
0W–2L 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.