Teams

RHCC RED

2024 TRIO - DEN · WOMEN 3.0 - TRIO

7 players · average NTRP 3.00 / 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
2024-04-27vs BP REDWon 20
W#1 DoublesCarla Grumann / Jennifer Curtis-Jones vs JJ Wagner / Erin Heltshe7-5, 4-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesJue Abrahamson / Lana Mendonca vs Megan Aliffi / Lisa Hoogendoorn Daniel6-2, 6-7, 1-0
2024-04-13vs NJ PINKWon 20
W#1 SinglesLana Mendonca vs Nicole Stevens5-7, 6-3, 1-0
W#2 DoublesCarla Grumann / Jue Abrahamson vs Jill Orsatti / Nina Miranda6-1, 3-6, 1-0
2024-04-06vs MC GREENWon 10
W#2 DoublesJue Abrahamson / Carla Grumann vs Claudia Perales / Meegan Miloud6-3, 7-6
2024-03-30vs NJ BLUEWon 20
W#1 DoublesMindi Pearse / Jennifer Curtis-Jones vs Janie Trevor / Carolyn Keim6-1, 7-5
W#2 DoublesCarla Grumann / Jue Abrahamson vs Zhenzhen Yu / Mary Rose Wilder7-5, 6-3
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 - TRIO 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 2.89 estimated across 6 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.

3.16
Mindi Pearse
published
2.92
Jue Abrahamson
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.89
Carla Grumann
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 3
2.87
Lana Mendonca
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.81
Jennifer Curtis-Jones
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.71
Jody Alderman
published
Maria Lucas
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.

Jue Abrahamson + Jody Alderman6264% games+8.8% vs expected
Jue Abrahamson + Carla Grumann10657% games+3.9% vs expected
Carla Grumann + Jennifer Curtis-Jones4451% games+1.6% vs expected
Jennifer Curtis-Jones + Jody Alderman4256% games+0.1% vs expected
Jue Abrahamson + Jennifer Curtis-Jones5159% gamesnot enough data
Jue Abrahamson + Lana Mendonca404 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.

Mindi Pearse
21W–10L career · no lines in 2024
12%87%1%
3.16
3
Jue Abrahamson
91W–29L career · 4 lines in 2024
<1%71%28%
2.92
3
Carla Grumann
84W–68L career · 4 lines in 2024
<1%78%22%
2.89
3
Lana Mendonca
42W–25L career · 2 lines in 2024
<1%82%17%
2.87
3
Jennifer Curtis-Jones
106W–61L career · 2 lines in 2024
1%90%8%
2.81
Jody Alderman
17W–13L career · no lines in 2024
7%91%2%
2.71
Maria Lucas
12W–6L career · no lines in 2024
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.