Teams

Pop & Lock

2023 Montgomery Combo Fall · Montgomery Combo 6.5 Women

13 players · average NTRP 3.00 / MARYLAND

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
2023-12-05vs Ace Ace BabyLost 01
L#1 DoublesMaria Angelica Camp / Kim Cooper vs Amber Surmiller / Anto Faini1-6, 0-6
2023-11-21vs TiebreakersWon 10
W#1 DoublesMaria Angelica Camp / Lisa Rispler vs Liz Price / Donna Westervelt6-2, 6-1
2023-11-02vs TiebreakersWon 10
W#2 DoublesMaria Angelica Camp / Lisa Rispler vs Helen Mahoney / Andrea Lemgruber Viol4-6, 6-3, 1-0
2023-10-28vs Ace Ace BabyWon 10
W#1 DoublesMaria Angelica Camp / Mariechen Bresler vs Mel Barrett / Lindsey Trickett6-3, 3-3
2023-10-12vs TiebreakersWon 10
W#1 DoublesMaria Angelica Camp / Lisa Rispler vs Lynn Pendergast / Christelle LaPolice7-5, 3-6, 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 Montgomery Combo 6.5 Women 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 2.74 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.

3.09
Kayla Lesesne
published
3.02
Jane Davenport
published
2.97
Maria Angelica Camp
usually #1 Doubles 80%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published 3
2.80
Margaret Cornelius
published
2.79
Adrienne Allen
published 3
2.72
Anne Findley
published 3
2.69
Chung Kim
published 3
2.63
Kim Cooper
published
2.54
Mariechen Bresler
published
2.52
Lemin Xiao
published
2.33
Wendy Wicker
published
Laurel Murphy
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.

Jane Davenport + Margaret Cornelius224 matchesnot enough data
Kim Cooper + Mariechen Bresler033 matchesnot enough data
Paula Kurtzweil Walter + Mariechen Bresler123 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.

Kayla Lesesne
11W–2L career · no lines in 2023
<1%25%75%
3.09
Jane Davenport
4W–14L career · no lines in 2023
43%57%<1%
3.02
3
Maria Angelica Camp
144W–113L career · 5 lines in 2023
<1%58%42%
2.97
Margaret Cornelius
14W–20L career · no lines in 2023
2%91%7%
2.80
3
Adrienne Allen
5W–12L career · no lines in 2023
2%91%7%
2.79
3
Anne Findley
3W–0L career · type S · no lines in 2023
6%92%2%
2.72
3
Chung Kim
10W–11L career · no lines in 2023
9%90%1%
2.69
Kim Cooper
15W–11L career · no lines in 2023
17%82%<1%
2.63
Mariechen Bresler
6W–22L career · no lines in 2023
39%61%<1%
2.54
Lemin Xiao
16W–28L career · no lines in 2023
45%55%<1%
2.52
Wendy Wicker
3W–9L career · no lines in 2023
88%12%<1%
2.33
Laurel Murphy
1W–0L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Paula Kurtzweil Walter
2W–5L 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.