Teams

Woodlake Morrison

2022 Richmond Flexible Format Working Women League · Richmond Flexible Format Working Women League 6.0

7 players · average NTRP 3.50 / VIRGINIA

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2022-06-13vs Westwood FittsLost 01
L#2 Female DoublesLaura Brawley / Irene Shepherd vs Jenny Sharrar / Jamie McLeod6-7, 2-6
2022-06-06vs RCC ArmstrongWon 10
W#1 Female DoublesIrene Shepherd / Jeanean Phelps vs Amy Wozniak / Kristen Roper6-3, 7-5
2022-05-16vs Raintree's Cheek ChicksWon 10
W#3 Female DoublesLaura Brawley / Irene Shepherd vs Jean Cheek / Cathy McLennan6-2, 6-1
2022-05-10Won 10
W#2 Female DoublesRebecca Schneeberger / Irene Shepherd vs Rocio Rosa / Ashley Howle6-3, 6-3
2022-05-09vs Ridgetop PughLost 01
L#3 Female DoublesIrene Shepherd / Rebecca Schneeberger vs Amanda Carr / Carin Krawitz5-7, 6-4, 0-1
2022-05-02vs Belmont Granger / TownsendSplit 11
W#2 Female DoublesIrene Shepherd / Rebecca Schneeberger vs ANNE TOMSKY / Tatenda Mupfudze6-0, 6-0
L#3 Female DoublesLaura Brawley / Jeanean Phelps vs Elizabeth Clark / Carolyn Hawley6-3, 6-7, 0-1
2022-04-25vs Salisbury JamisonLost 01
L#1 Female DoublesIrene Shepherd / Lisa Elliott vs Donna Jamison / Becky McNeer2-6, 2-6
2022-04-11vs Raintree FosterWon 10
W#1 Female DoublesIrene Shepherd / Carolyn Wieder vs Shannon Foster / Elizabeth Pully6-4, 3-6, 1-0
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 Richmond Flexible Format Working Women League 6.0 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 2.85 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.

3.34
Irene Shepherd
usually #1 Female Doubles 38%, also #2 Female Doubles 38% · published 3.5
2.90
Jeanean Phelps
usually #3 Female Doubles 40%, also #1 Female Doubles 40% · published
2.79
2.77
Julia Morrison
published
2.72
Taryn Giroux
published
2.60
Laura Brawley
published
Kathleen Laroche
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.

Jeanean Phelps + Irene Shepherd10558% games+8.1% vs expected
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.

3.5
Irene Shepherd
111W–81L career · 8 lines in 2022
<1%89%11%
3.34
Jeanean Phelps
145W–152L career · 5 lines in 2022
<1%78%22%
2.90
Rebecca Schneeberger
10W–9L career · no lines in 2022
1%93%5%
2.79
Julia Morrison
2W–5L career · no lines in 2022
2%94%4%
2.77
Taryn Giroux
16W–11L career · no lines in 2022
4%94%2%
2.72
Laura Brawley
5W–9L career · no lines in 2022
22%78%<1%
2.60
Kathleen Laroche
1W–4L 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.