Teams

CIN Indianapolis, Combo 8.5 W, Fernandez (UINDY)

Spring USTA Central Indiana Combo Adult · CIN Indy Adult Combo 8.5 Women, S

15 players · average NTRP 3.90 / CENTRAL INDIANA

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 →
Schedule6 played
L#1 DoublesDonna Deiters / Megan Fernandez vs Theresa Bayt / Cindy Martin5-7, 7-6, 0-1
W#2 DoublesANN KEATON / Sheri Faulkenberg vs Rachel Dyer / Erica Curtiss3-6, 6-3, 1-0
W#3 DoublesMartha Harker / Nanelle Rosales vs Shelby Ackerman / Allison Newman7-6, 3-1
L#1 DoublesPamela Kane / Ruth Grissom vs Margaret Corbett / Nicola Frazer2-6, 4-6
L#2 DoublesSheri Faulkenberg / Lisa Radez vs Abby Moore / Madison Hentschel5-7, 2-6
W#3 DoublesMartha Harker / Nanelle Rosales vs Michelle Dumas / Angela Agricola6-2, 6-2
L#1 DoublesMegan Fernandez / Leah Gehring vs Lynn Ducat / Amy Barrett6-4, 1-6, 0-1
W#2 DoublesDonna Deiters / Kimberley Kinsley vs Kristi Moschel / Thetchen Price7-6, 2-5, 1-0
L#3 DoublesJulie Elliott / Nanelle Rosales vs Jennifer Crouter-Clouse / Heidi Leonard5-7, 3-6
L#1 DoublesKimberley Kinsley / Melissa Sanders vs Annie Chechitelli / Anna Koval4-6, 4-6
L#2 DoublesSheri Faulkenberg / Martha Harker vs Colleen ONeal / Laura Rudicle1-6, 2-6
W#3 DoublesNanelle Rosales / Stephanie Smith vs Jessica Corbin-Mahaney / Erin LaBuz6-2, 6-1
W#1 DoublesRuth Grissom / Pamela Kane vs Rachel Dyer / Allison Newman6-4, 6-5
L#2 DoublesMegan Fernandez / Martha Harker vs Shelby Ackerman / Heidi Somers2-6, 3-6
W#3 DoublesNanelle Rosales / ERIKA HOLLY vs Theresa Bayt / Erica Curtiss6-3, 6-1
W#1 DoublesNanelle Rosales / Stephanie Smith vs Allison Davis / Emily Wandel1-6, 6-4, 1-0
L#2 DoublesJulie Elliott / Martha Harker vs Lesley Cahalan / Galina Blomenkamp1-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesLeah Gehring / Megan Fernandez vs Lisa Pruitt / Emily Thompson6-4, 2-6, 0-1
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 standings6 teams · CIN Indy Adult Combo 8.5 Women, S
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1CIN Indianapolis, Combo 8.5 W, Squires (PATC)6117413145
2CIN Indianapolis, Combo 8.5 W, Thompson (IRC-D)6115616166
3CIN Indianapolis, Combo 8.5 W, Trott (CRC)3481328202
4CIN Indianapolis, Combo 8.5 W, Fernandez (UINDY)2481023179
5CIN Indianapolis, Combo 8.5 W, Hill (CRC)2461224172
6CIN Indianapolis, Combo 8.5 W, Ackerman (IRC-D)1661533214

Ordered by team wins, then losses, then sets lost — the order USTA uses to seed a flight. Individual wins are lines, not ties.

See the full flight, with every team’s record

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 3.72 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.

4.20
Melissa Sanders
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.97
Ruth Grissom
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.89
ANN KEATON
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.89
Martha Harker
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published
3.85
Kimberley Kinsley
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published
3.80
Nanelle Rosales
usually #3 Doubles 83%, also #1 Doubles 17% · published 4
Donna Deiters
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.59
Leah Gehring
usually #3 Doubles 60%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published
3.58
Sheri Faulkenberg
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
3.54
Megan Fernandez
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
3.48
ERIKA HOLLY
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.12
Cecilia Perez Moreno
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
Julie Elliott
published
Lisa Radez
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Pamela 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.

Sheri Faulkenberg + Leah Gehring191353% games+7.0% vs expected
Ruth Grissom + Pamela Kane3355% games+6.6% vs expected
Melissa Sanders + Megan Fernandez2543% games+3.3% vs expected
Ruth Grissom + ANN KEATON4254% gamesnot enough data
Nanelle Rosales + Martha Harker4161% gamesnot enough data
Melissa Sanders + Donna Deiters314 matchesnot enough data
Ruth Grissom + Julie Elliott213 matchesnot enough data
Julie Elliott + Megan Fernandez033 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 Sanders
63W–47L career · 1 line in 2024
6%93%1%
4.20
Ruth Grissom
66W–52L career · 2 lines in 2024
60%40%<1%
3.97
4
ANN KEATON
207W–120L career · 1 line in 2024
<1%80%20%
3.89
Martha Harker
242W–121L career · 5 lines in 2024
<1%80%19%
3.89
Kimberley Kinsley
34W–34L career · 5 lines in 2024
<1%88%12%
3.85
4
Nanelle Rosales
84W–47L career · 6 lines in 2024
1%93%6%
3.80
4
Donna Deiters
36W–31L career · 2 lines in 2024
not enough data
Leah Gehring
65W–54L career · 5 lines in 2024
24%76%<1%
3.59
Sheri Faulkenberg
105W–94L career · 6 lines in 2024
26%74%<1%
3.58
Megan Fernandez
97W–178L career · 4 lines in 2024
39%61%<1%
3.54
4
ERIKA HOLLY
178W–108L career · 2 lines in 2024
57%43%<1%
3.48
3.5
Cecilia Perez Moreno
33W–68L career · 2 lines in 2024
18%82%<1%
3.12
Julie Elliott
57W–61L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Lisa Radez
30W–28L career · 1 line in 2024
not enough data
Pamela Kane
57W–31L 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.