Teams

TOHS.Rider

2022 CTRL Summer Singles 40 & Over · Summer Singles 40 & Over 3.5 Women

6 players · average NTRP 3.70 / NORTH CAROLINA

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 →
Schedule7 played
2022-08-27vs TOC.SmythWon 21
W#1 SinglesMeghan Rider vs Laura Rendon6-3, 6-2
L#2 SinglesAllyson Schneider vs Mary Jo Dunnington2-6, 0-6
W#3 SinglesKimberly Hilt vs Sheza Healey6-2, 6-3
2022-08-02vs PW.MartinSplit 11
W#1 SinglesMeghan Rider vs Jennifer Hensley6-0, 6-2
L#2 SinglesEmily Starritt vs Maura Lever6-2, 1-6, 0-1
2022-07-03Won 10
W#1 SinglesEmily Starritt vs Lorena Warix6-2, 6-1
2022-06-29vs LOCH.PeltWon 21
W#1 SinglesAllyson Schneider vs Wendy Hanshew7-6, 3-6, 1-0
L#2 SinglesMeghan Rider vs Paula Fernandez-Pita1-6, 2-6
W#3 SinglesEmily Starritt vs Kristine Pelt6-4, 3-6, 1-0
2022-06-22vs TOC.IrishWon 10
W#1 SinglesKimberly Hilt vs Shelly Jude6-4, 6-2
2022-06-14vs MD.McKinleyWon 20
W#1 SinglesAllyson Schneider vs Barbara Campbell6-4, 6-1
W#2 SinglesKimberly Hilt vs Hillary Parnell6-3, 6-1
2022-06-01vs PW.LEEWon 20
W#1 SinglesAllyson Schneider vs Kearsi Kessler6-3, 6-4
W#2 SinglesMeghan Rider vs Ellen Libby6-1, 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 Summer Singles 40 & Over 3.5 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 3.42 estimated across 5 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.

3.62
Emily Starritt
usually #3 Singles 33%, also #1 Singles 33% · published 4
3.54
Meghan Rider
usually #2 Singles 50%, also #1 Singles 50% · published 4
3.50
Kimberly Hilt
usually #2 Singles 33%, also #1 Singles 33% · published 3.5
3.32
Allyson Schneider
usually #1 Singles 75%, also #2 Singles 25% · published 3.5
3.13
Angela Ray
published 3.5
Anne Hungate
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.

Allyson Schneider + Kimberly Hilt17465% games+7.3% vs expected
Meghan Rider + Emily Starritt8360% games−7.2% vs expected
Kimberly Hilt + Meghan Rider11464% gamesnot enough data
Allyson Schneider + Meghan Rider303 matchesnot enough data
Kimberly Hilt + Emily Starritt303 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.

4
Emily Starritt
205W–104L career · 3 lines in 2022
18%82%<1%
3.62
4
Meghan Rider
342W–169L career · 4 lines in 2022
39%61%<1%
3.54
3.5
Kimberly Hilt
350W–172L career · 3 lines in 2022
<1%50%50%
3.50
3.5
Allyson Schneider
292W–173L career · 4 lines in 2022
1%91%8%
3.32
3.5
Angela Ray
4W–3L career · no lines in 2022
16%84%<1%
3.13
Anne Hungate
9W–7L career · no lines 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.