Teams

5BRC-NOVOTNY Team Singles 3.5 Women SEM F2

2023 SEM WINTER TEAM SINGLES · 2023 WOMEN 3.5 WINTER SINGLES SEM

13 players · average NTRP 3.50 / S.E. MICHIGAN

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 →
Schedule9 played
L#1 SinglesAubrey Casey vs Riya Cao2-6, 5-6
L#2 SinglesCita Greve vs Minlu Chen6-7
L#3 SinglesLaura Zapytowski vs Meg Mateer0-6, 2-6
W#1 SinglesRheanon Parrino vs Sara Van Wormer7-6, 1-0
W#2 SinglesMaya Zayat vs Kristin Dimsdale6-1, 4-6, 1-0
W#3 SinglesSarah Cvetanovski vs Christine Scott6-1, 6-3
W#1 SinglesMary Cornelius vs N/A6-0, 6-0
L#2 SinglesMarni Young vs Shannon Morgan3-6, 2-6
L#3 SinglesAubrey Casey vs Meredith Tyack6-2, 4-6, 0-1
W#1 SinglesCindy Cole vs Michelle Mazur6-3, 5-2
W#2 SinglesAubrey Casey vs Heidi Maglicic6-1, 2-6, 1-0
W#3 SinglesMaya Zayat vs Jude Dokianos6-0, 6-4
W#1 SinglesRheanon Parrino vs Jennifer Berk-King6-1, 6-0
W#2 SinglesMary Cornelius vs AnnMarie Sanford6-3, 5-7, 1-0
W#1 SinglesRheanon Parrino vs Elizabeth Mosher6-3, 3-2
W#2 SinglesCita Greve vs Huiping Chen6-2, 0-6, 1-0
W#3 SinglesRobin MacLeish vs Lori Woods6-2, 2-5
L#1 SinglesNicole Mahoney vs Lee Benson2-6, 6-3, 0-1
L#2 SinglesMaya Zayat vs Sara Van Wormer3-6, 1-3
W#3 SinglesAubrey Casey vs N/A6-0, 6-0
W#1 SinglesCita Greve vs Kristy Doherty7-6
L#2 SinglesLaura Zapytowski vs Elizabeth Mazurco3-6, 2-6
L#1 SinglesAubrey Casey vs Dominika Ronikier-Rangi7-5, 1-6
L#2 SinglesCindy Cole vs Kelly Coe6-7, 1-1
L#3 SinglesMarni Young vs Rebecca Stoitsiadis0-6, 3-6
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 standings11 teams · 2023 WOMEN 3.5 WINTER SINGLES SEM
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
14LIB-MARLEY Team Singles 3.5 Women SEM F17120410124
22LIFE-LAMAR Team Singles 3.5 Women SEM F272171023209
34SCWB-CHEN Team Singles 3.5 Women SEM F263151225208
46BRC-SCOTT Team Singles 3.5 Women SEM F263131427217
53LIB-OBRIEN Team Singles 3.5 Women SEM F153141023180
62HV-KRUMMEL Team Singles 3.5 Women SEM F144121227203
75CHIP-CLIFF Team Singles 3.5 Women SEM F13571731214
83DEER-JOSEPH Team Singles 3.5 Women SEM F236121536233
91PEACH-MAZUR Team Singles 3.5 Women SEM F227121529210
105BRC-NOVOTNY Team Singles 3.5 Women SEM F2146918118
111LIB-HAESSLER Team Singles 3.5 Women SEM F11771730205

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 3.17 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.

3.52
Rheanon Parrino
usually #1 Singles 100% · published
3.32
Laura Zapytowski
usually #2 Singles 50%, also #3 Singles 50% · published 3.5
3.29
Mary Cornelius
usually #2 Singles 50%, also #1 Singles 50% · published 3.5
Amy Endres
published 3.5
3.25
Cita Greve
usually #2 Singles 67%, also #1 Singles 33% · published 3.5
3.23
Cindy Cole
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #2 Singles 50% · published 3.5
3.10
Marni Young
usually #2 Singles 50%, also #3 Singles 50% · published
3.08
Robin MacLeish
usually #3 Singles 100% · published 3.5
3.06
Sarah Cvetanovski
usually #3 Singles 100% · published 3.5
3.05
Nicole Mahoney
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 3.5
2.99
Aubrey Casey
usually #1 Singles 40%, also #3 Singles 40% · published 3.5
2.98
Kandace Novotny
published 3.5
Maya Zayat
usually #2 Singles 67%, also #3 Singles 33% · 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.

Laura Zapytowski + Cindy Cole8458% games+9.8% vs expected
Marni Young + Mary Cornelius4154% games+6.0% vs expected
Kandace Novotny + Sarah Cvetanovski161059% games+3.8% vs expected
Nicole Mahoney + Marni Young61045% games−0.7% vs expected
Sarah Cvetanovski + Mary Cornelius4349% games−2.9% vs expected
Cindy Cole + Kandace Novotny9652% games−4.5% vs expected
Sarah Cvetanovski + Amy Endres3362% gamesnot enough data
Nicole Mahoney + Robin MacLeish134 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.

Rheanon Parrino
85W–44L career · 3 lines in 2023
44%56%<1%
3.52
3.5
Laura Zapytowski
82W–79L career · 2 lines in 2023
1%91%9%
3.32
3.5
Mary Cornelius
60W–61L career · 2 lines in 2023
1%93%5%
3.29
3.5
Amy Endres
50W–44L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
3.5
Cita Greve
83W–64L career · 3 lines in 2023
3%95%3%
3.25
3.5
Cindy Cole
159W–95L career · 2 lines in 2023
4%94%2%
3.23
Marni Young
74W–90L career · 2 lines in 2023
23%77%<1%
3.10
3.5
Robin MacLeish
53W–63L career · 1 line in 2023
26%74%<1%
3.08
3.5
Sarah Cvetanovski
107W–80L career · 1 line in 2023
31%69%<1%
3.06
3.5
Nicole Mahoney
99W–104L career · 1 line in 2023
35%65%<1%
3.05
3.5
Aubrey Casey
34W–70L career · 5 lines in 2023
54%46%<1%
2.99
3.5
Kandace Novotny
104W–98L career · no lines in 2023
56%44%<1%
2.98
Maya Zayat
10W–10L career · 3 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.