Teams

Havin Fun

2022 DC WTA Tri-Level 18 & Over · Tri level Women 3.5, 3.0, 2.5

11 players · average NTRP 3.21 / WASHINGTON D.C.

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
2022-11-20vs Piney Run WomenWon 20
W#2 DoublesBronwen Williams / Kara Choe vs M Miles / Penelope Wilson7-6, 5-0
W#3 DoublesEmily Schabacker / Emily Eisenhauer vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2022-11-06vs DC Tennis ClubWon 10
W#3 DoublesAzalea Candelaria / Emily Schabacker vs Nancy Haaga / Nancy Lutz2-6, 6-2, 1-0
2022-10-30Won 10
W#2 DoublesLaree Martin / Bronwen Williams vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2022-10-23vs Piney Run WomenWon 20
W#2 DoublesHeidi Hill / Bronwen Williams vs M Miles / Penelope Wilson7-5, 3-2
W#3 DoublesEmily Schabacker / Megan Monaco vs Kisha Clark / Meredith Owen6-0, 6-2
2022-10-16vs DC Tennis ClubWon 20
W#2 DoublesLaree Martin / Bronwen Williams vs Amy Clement / Elissa Malkin6-2, 6-1
W#3 DoublesEmily Eisenhauer / Emily Schabacker vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2022-10-09vs Hains Point Killer BeesLost 01
L#3 DoublesEmily Schabacker / Azalea Candelaria vs Meghan Metzbower / Payuna Uday4-6, 5-4
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 Tri level Women 3.5, 3.0, 2.5 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 3.10 estimated across 4 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.

3.38
Sharon Sabasteanski
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
3.33
Amy Cahoon
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
Angela Garcia
published 3.5
Carolina Herrera
published 3.5
2.94
Emily Schabacker
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.73
Bronwen Williams
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
Azalea Candelaria
published 2.5
Emily Eisenhauer
published
Kara Choe
published
Laree Martin
published
Megan Monaco
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.

Sharon Sabasteanski + Amy Cahoon123 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.

3.5
Sharon Sabasteanski
255W–176L career · 10 lines in 2022
<1%82%18%
3.38
3.5
Amy Cahoon
181W–281L career · 8 lines in 2022
1%90%9%
3.33
3.5
Angela Garcia
1W–4L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
3.5
Carolina Herrera
2W–1L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
3
Emily Schabacker
158W–173L career · 5 lines in 2022
<1%68%32%
2.94
3
Bronwen Williams
109W–99L career · 4 lines in 2022
4%94%2%
2.73
2.5
Azalea Candelaria
7W–13L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Emily Eisenhauer
0W–1L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Kara Choe
9W–15L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Laree Martin
12W–11L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Megan Monaco
8W–6L career · no lines in 2022
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.