Teams

PH PINK

2022 CTA WOMEN'S SUMMER DAYTIME - DEN · WOMEN 3.0 - SUMMER DAYTIME

10 players · average NTRP 2.88 / COLORADO

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 →
Schedule4 played
2022-09-12vs HRCA BLUELost 12
L#1 DoublesBeth Wright / Meshach Rhoades vs Sarah Nelson / Cynthia Clifford4-6, 3-6
L#1 SinglesMarla Schroeder vs Natalie Lucero2-6, 2-6
W#2 DoublesNancy Waas / Jennifer Fahey vs Elizabeth Anderson / Chris Patterson7-6, 6-3
2022-09-08Won 10
W#1 DoublesAmy Attwood / Beth Wright vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2022-08-29vs KC PINKWon 10
W#1 DoublesAmy Attwood / Meshach Rhoades vs Christine Angelini / Lay Chan6-2, 6-0
2022-08-15vs SSHP BLUELost 12
W#1 DoublesAmy Attwood / Beth Wright vs Brooke Wagner / Wendy Hynes6-3, 6-2
L#1 SinglesJane Carlson vs Emma Katubig4-6, 0-6
L#2 DoublesTara Wolfe / Amy Stettner vs Cherie Mitchell / Karen Keehan Odendahl4-6, 2-6
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 WOMEN 3.0 - SUMMER DAYTIME 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 2.66 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.

3.02
3.00
Jennifer Fahey
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.97
Marla Schroeder
usually #1 Singles 100% · published
2.78
Amy Attwood
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
Beth Wright
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.53
Tara Wolfe
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Amy Stettner
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 2.5
2.22
Jane Carlson
usually #1 Singles 100% · published
2.13
Nancy Waas
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Meshach Rhoades
usually #1 Doubles 100% · 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.

Amy Stettner + Jennifer Fahey4159% games+13.6% vs expected
Amy Stettner + Tara Wolfe3348% games+6.5% vs expected
Beth Wright + Amy Attwood6354% games+3.0% vs expected
Tara Wolfe + Amy Attwood3546% games−2.9% vs expected
Marla Schroeder + Amy Attwood314 matchesnot enough data
Tara Wolfe + Jennifer Fahey044 matchesnot enough data
Amy Attwood + Meshach Rhoades314 matchesnot enough data
Marla Schroeder + Nancy Waas123 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
Carissa Hollander
45W–20L career · no lines in 2022
<1%44%56%
3.02
Jennifer Fahey
76W–36L career · 1 line in 2022
<1%51%49%
3.00
Marla Schroeder
44W–50L career · 1 line in 2022
<1%59%41%
2.97
3
Amy Attwood
83W–71L career · 3 lines in 2022
2%94%4%
2.78
3
Beth Wright
36W–28L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
Tara Wolfe
31W–46L career · 1 line in 2022
41%59%<1%
2.53
2.5
Amy Stettner
25W–19L career · 1 line in 2022
not enough data
Jane Carlson
24W–64L career · 1 line in 2022
99%1%<1%
2.22
Nancy Waas
28W–45L career · 1 line in 2022
0%>99%<1%
2.13
Meshach Rhoades
38W–7L career · 1 line 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.