Teams

ICT Anderson 1:00pm

2023 Women's Daytime Doubles · 4.0 Women

16 players · average NTRP 3.83 / NORTHERN

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 →

Flight standings for 4.0 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 3.37 estimated across 16 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.

3.89
Laura Stromgren
published
3.88
Jane Fields
published
3.74
Amy Biewen
published 4
3.71
Shae Rohling
published
3.54
Hillary Olson
published 4
3.53
Virginia de la Riva
published
3.46
Sarah Tuel
published
3.24
Janet Czaia
published
3.21
Amy Haugen
published 3.5
3.19
Kathy Jungquist
published
3.19
Janet Nauman
published
3.10
Sarah LeDoux
published
3.09
Pam Boorsma
published
3.07
Kathy Burns
published
3.07
Marcia Harris
published
3.04
Patricia Rhodus
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.

Kathy Burns + Sarah LeDoux5744% games+1.1% vs expected
Hillary Olson + Virginia de la Riva1936% games−14.5% vs expected
Janet Nauman + Kathy Jungquist033 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.

Laura Stromgren
30W–26L career · no lines in 2023
<1%80%19%
3.89
Jane Fields
33W–12L career · no lines in 2023
<1%81%19%
3.88
4
Amy Biewen
26W–21L career · no lines in 2023
3%95%2%
3.74
Shae Rohling
35W–33L career · no lines in 2023
5%93%1%
3.71
4
Hillary Olson
12W–22L career · no lines in 2023
36%64%<1%
3.54
Virginia de la Riva
9W–26L career · no lines in 2023
40%60%<1%
3.53
Sarah Tuel
75W–30L career · no lines in 2023
<1%61%39%
3.46
Janet Czaia
6W–4L career · no lines in 2023
3%95%2%
3.24
3.5
Amy Haugen
4W–1L career · no lines in 2023
5%93%1%
3.21
Kathy Jungquist
8W–18L career · no lines in 2023
7%92%1%
3.19
Janet Nauman
9W–37L career · no lines in 2023
7%92%1%
3.19
Sarah LeDoux
15W–23L career · no lines in 2023
22%78%<1%
3.10
Pam Boorsma
11W–5L career · no lines in 2023
24%76%<1%
3.09
Kathy Burns
20W–24L career · no lines in 2023
28%71%<1%
3.07
Marcia Harris
16W–15L career · no lines in 2023
29%71%<1%
3.07
Patricia Rhodus
5W–10L career · no lines in 2023
39%61%<1%
3.04

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.