Teams

JGardiner (OPRC)

2023 Adult 18 & Over League · 18 & Over Adult 4.5 Women - Tues PM

12 players · average NTRP 4.40 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
2023-05-01vs KCochran/STo (Queens)Won 10
W#1 DoublesSharon Gehrig / Emma Drake vs Susan Sutherland / Xersalyn Threet2-6, 6-4, 1-0
2023-04-25vs CStaton (Park Road)Lost 01
L#1 DoublesSharon Gehrig / Jennifer Fayad vs Diana West / Ivey Westerkam6-7, 4-6
2023-04-04vs WParker/JAlexander (Queens)Split 11
L#2 DoublesJennifer Gardiner / Sharon Gehrig vs Becky Tennyson / Jennifer Watson4-6, 7-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesTylee Kessler / Carolyn Drake vs Wendy Parker / Jennifer Alexander6-4, 4-6, 1-0
2023-03-28vs MParker/CHart (Queens)Won 10
W#2 DoublesJennifer Gardiner / Tylee Kessler vs Amanda Patrocino / Mary Parker6-2, 6-1
2023-02-28vs CStaton (Park Road)Lost 01
L#1 DoublesSharon Gehrig / Stephanie Ladley vs Diana West / Jaclyn Rock7-6, 4-6, 1-0
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 18 & Over Adult 4.5 Women - Tues PM 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 4.13 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.

4.43
Tylee Kessler
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 4.5
4.24
Eryn Ratcliffe
published 4.5
4.23
Sharon Gehrig
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 4.5
4.21
Carolyn Drake
published 4.5
4.19
Stephanie Ladley
published
4.18
Jennifer Gardiner
published
4.08
Jennifer Fayad
published
3.96
Suzy Johnson
published
3.92
Susan Jaffe
published
3.83
Amanda Meloni
published 4
Kristen Montgomery
published
Lisa Kane
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 Gardiner + Carolyn Drake2344% gamesnot enough data
Suzy Johnson + Eryn Ratcliffe314 matchesnot enough data
Jennifer Gardiner + Tylee Kessler213 matchesnot enough data
Carolyn Drake + Tylee Kessler303 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
Tylee Kessler
128W–43L career · 2 lines in 2023
<1%69%31%
4.43
4.5
Eryn Ratcliffe
22W–20L career · no lines in 2023
3%94%2%
4.24
4.5
Sharon Gehrig
44W–28L career · 4 lines in 2023
4%94%2%
4.23
4.5
Carolyn Drake
24W–28L career · no lines in 2023
5%94%1%
4.21
Stephanie Ladley
9W–1L career · no lines in 2023
7%92%1%
4.19
Jennifer Gardiner
38W–32L career · no lines in 2023
8%91%1%
4.18
Jennifer Fayad
6W–4L career · no lines in 2023
28%72%<1%
4.08
Suzy Johnson
55W–22L career · no lines in 2023
<1%62%38%
3.96
Susan Jaffe
27W–32L career · no lines in 2023
<1%73%27%
3.92
4
Amanda Meloni
7W–10L career · no lines in 2023
1%90%9%
3.83
Kristen Montgomery
0W–1L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Lisa Kane
1W–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.