← Teams

VTC-Mills/Clancy

2023 Adult 18 & Over · 3.5 Women

7 players · average NTRP 3.43 · USTA/PACIFIC NW / NORTHERN OREGON

View scouting list →
Scouting

Roster averages 3.24 estimated across 7 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.

3.52
Katrina Phillips
usually #1 Singles 44%, also #2 Singles 33% · published 4
3.45
Natasha Weinstock
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.28
Lynne Nieda
usually #2 Doubles 40%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
3.24
Janet Mills
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
3.19
Kyra John
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.12
Vanessa Weber
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.86
Teresa Darling
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 3
Results10 ties
2023-07-07Lost 0–1
L#1 DoublesLynne Nieda / Tina Clancy vs Kimberly Lanier / Molly Taylor5-7, 6-1, 1-0
2023-06-24Won 1–0
W#2 DoublesTina Clancy / Janet Mills vs Eileen Francisco / Kathrine Wright4-6, 7-5, 1-0
2023-03-25Lost 1–2
L#1 DoublesJennifer Bane / Natasha Weinstock vs Michelle Posey / Michele Desmarais6-1, 6-2
W#2 DoublesTina Clancy / Katrina Phillips vs Lee Rahr / Kim Hasle7-5, 1-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesKyra John / Vanessa Weber vs Alexandra Lee / Julie Kim3-6, 6-4, 1-0
2023-03-19Won 3–0
W#1 DoublesNatasha Weinstock / Jennifer Bane vs Chelsea Dyapa / Jordan Brown6-2, 6-2
W#2 DoublesJanet Mills / Jannell Cuddy vs Celene Robert / Morganne Hatfield5-7, 6-3, 1-0
W#3 DoublesTeresa Darling / Lynne Nieda vs Michelle Robbins / Lisa Bledsoe6-3, 6-1
2023-03-11Won 2–1
W#1 DoublesJanet Mills / Jannell Cuddy vs Kiersten Lake / Chris van Leeuwen6-2, 3-6, 1-0
L#1 SinglesKatrina Phillips vs Jennifer Drew6-4, 6-2
W#3 DoublesLynne Nieda / Teresa Darling vs Patricia Eargle / Nancy Salisbury6-3, 6-2
2023-03-05Won 2–0
W#1 DoublesTina Clancy / Katrina Phillips vs Bin He / Theresa Fichter6-3, 1-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesNatasha Weinstock / Lynne Nieda vs Jeny Joseph / Yanchen Qi6-2, 3-6, 1-0
2023-02-25Lost 0–4
L#1 DoublesJennifer Bane / Kyra John vs Ann Skoog / Adrienne VanBeckhoven6-1, 6-3
L#2 DoublesAllie Mauck / Teresa Darling vs Gail Bolte / Karen Harlow6-4, 6-4
L#2 SinglesKatrina Phillips vs Jennifer Potter6-2, 1-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesNatasha Weinstock / Vanessa Weber vs Emily Vander Ploeg / Kristin Bialobok6-3, 7-5
2023-02-11Won 3–1
L#1 DoublesNatasha Weinstock / Tina Clancy vs Colleen Kellogg / Shelby Hill4-6, 6-4, 1-0
W#1 SinglesKatrina Phillips vs Nina Bakos6-3, 7-6
W#2 DoublesJennifer Bane / Teresa Darling vs Amy Ouellette / Kim Boston6-4, 5-7, 1-0
W#3 DoublesVanessa Weber / Michele Beaman vs Annette Hill / Sarah Mutal6-4, 5-7, 1-0
2023-01-22Split 1–1
L#2 DoublesJanet Mills / Kyra John vs Kaie Wellman / Ann Arp2-6, 7-5, 1-0
W#3 DoublesNatasha Weinstock / Allie Mauck vs Hilary Johnson / Jean Zuber Marshburn6-2, 6-2
2023-01-14Won 3–0
W#1 DoublesJanet Mills / Tina Clancy vs Sammie Sue Willenborg / Traina Giles6-2, 6-1
W#1 SinglesKatrina Phillips vs Sarah Tufts6-2, 2-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesKyra John / Lynne Nieda vs Abigail Taylor / Christine Taylor6-1, 7-5
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.
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.

4
Katrina Phillips
35W–40L career · type A
30%70%0%
3.52
3.5
Natasha Weinstock
33W–31L career
0%90%10%
3.45
3.5
Lynne Nieda
62W–51L career
1%99%0%
3.28
3.5
Janet Mills
66W–75L career
1%99%0%
3.24
3.5
Kyra John
42W–40L career
3%96%0%
3.19
3
Vanessa Weber
56W–35L career
0%47%53%
3.12
3
Teresa Darling
122W–102L career
0%98%2%
2.86

Three percentages are the year-end projection — chance of moving down, staying, moving up — and the number on the right is our estimated dynamic rating, which USTA never publishes. 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.