Teams

C.Haynes

2023 Cap Adult 18 & Over · 3.0 Women

14 players · average NTRP 3.20 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule7 played
2023-05-08vs J.AndrewsLost 03
L#1 DoublesMelanie Hewitt / Erin Hemminger vs Lorah Henry / Catherine White6-3, 3-6, 0-1
L#2 DoublesConnie Haynes / Sheila Breckenridge vs Meghan Paris / Melissa Burke4-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesTina Dahir / Stephanie Black vs Brooke Jenkins / Jennifer Badham2-6, 3-6
2023-05-07vs R.WellsWon 30
W#1 DoublesMerab Puleo / Sara Mazurak vs Jerri Lemanski / Kathryn Poole7-6, 6-2
W#2 DoublesErin Hemminger / Michelle Gessner vs Mary Elizabeth Phillips / Robin Wells6-3, 6-1
W#2 SinglesKaren Southern vs Callie Ward6-2, 6-0
2023-04-23vs M.GillWon 30
W#1 DoublesJennifer van Campen / Melanie Hewitt vs Jenna Cobb / Karen Bornhofen6-0, 6-3
W#2 DoublesSara Mazurak / Merab Puleo vs Mary Allison Raper / Rebecca Anderson6-2, 6-2
W#3 DoublesMichele Lagerstedt / Karen Southern vs Christine Johnson / Caroline Braswell6-1, 6-0
2023-04-16vs J.SolomonWon 40
W#1 DoublesConnie Haynes / Sheila Breckenridge vs McGavock Edwards / Dana Earle6-1, 6-2
W#2 DoublesTina Dahir / Ann Hahn vs Michele Nowicki / Suzy Blackwell6-7, 6-4, 1-0
W#2 SinglesSara Mazurak vs Catherine Bray6-4, 6-2
W#3 DoublesMichele Lagerstedt / Karen Southern vs Amanda Meyer / Beth Shelly6-2, 6-1
2023-04-02vs K.KingWon 21
W#1 DoublesJennifer van Campen / Michelle Gessner vs Keeley McCormick / Kristen Duke6-2, 6-2
W#2 DoublesMelanie Hewitt / Erin Hemminger vs Jaime Clark / Beth Fletcher6-4, 6-4
L#2 SinglesConnie Haynes vs Karen Johnston2-6, 2-6
2023-03-21vs B.Robinson 3.0 18+Lost 12
L#1 DoublesMichelle Gessner / Erin Hemminger vs Jennifer Martin / Paige Boyles2-6, 6-2, 0-1
L#2 DoublesKaren Southern / Michele Lagerstedt vs Jennifer McFarling / Sarah Winstead5-7, 1-6
W#3 DoublesMerab Puleo / Sara Mazurak vs Wendy Roberts / Stephanie Gillespie6-0, 6-1
2023-03-19vs K.LambWon 30
W#1 DoublesJennifer van Campen / Sheila Breckenridge vs Alix Beltz / Vanessa Manuel6-0, 6-7, 1-0
W#2 DoublesSara Mazurak / Melanie Hewitt vs Kimberly Lamb / Louise Hutchinson6-1, 6-4
W#3 DoublesStephanie Black / Tina Dahir vs Marsha Seymour / Jo Ann Novak4-6, 6-1, 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 3.0 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 3.01 estimated across 13 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.

3.75
Kim Peters
published
3.46
Sara Mazurak
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #1 Doubles 22% · published 3.5
3.33
Merab Puleo
published
3.10
Sheila Breckenridge
usually #3 Doubles 43%, also #1 Doubles 29% · published 3.5
2.99
Jennifer van Campen
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
2.98
Melanie Hewitt
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
2.92
Michelle Gessner
published
2.85
Karen Southern
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3
2.82
Michele Lagerstedt
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.79
Erin Hemminger
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.79
Connie Haynes
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #2 Singles 17% · published 3
2.77
Stephanie Black
published
Ann Hahn
published 3
2.56
Tina Dahir
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3
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.

Jennifer van Campen + Karen Southern7262% games+16.2% vs expected
Michelle Gessner + Connie Haynes5256% games−1.6% vs expected
Sheila Breckenridge + Connie Haynes261061% games−7.1% vs expected
Melanie Hewitt + Sara Mazurak10267% gamesnot enough data
Connie Haynes + Sara Mazurak6457% gamesnot enough data
Jennifer van Campen + Melanie Hewitt7170% gamesnot enough data
Karen Southern + Michele Lagerstedt5357% gamesnot enough data
Jennifer van Campen + Erin Hemminger2547% gamesnot 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.

Kim Peters
23W–22L career · no lines in 2023
3%95%3%
3.75
3.5
Sara Mazurak
168W–65L career · 8 lines in 2023
<1%63%37%
3.46
Merab Puleo
5W–3L career · no lines in 2023
1%90%9%
3.33
3.5
Sheila Breckenridge
161W–94L career · 7 lines in 2023
21%79%<1%
3.10
3.5
Jennifer van Campen
110W–67L career · 3 lines in 2023
52%48%<1%
2.99
3.5
Melanie Hewitt
94W–57L career · 4 lines in 2023
55%45%<1%
2.98
Michelle Gessner
11W–12L career · no lines in 2023
<1%73%27%
2.92
3
Karen Southern
87W–112L career · 4 lines in 2023
<1%87%13%
2.85
3
Michele Lagerstedt
58W–62L career · 3 lines in 2023
1%91%8%
2.82
3
Erin Hemminger
96W–65L career · 4 lines in 2023
1%93%6%
2.79
3
Connie Haynes
147W–79L career · 6 lines in 2023
1%94%5%
2.79
Stephanie Black
5W–9L career · no lines in 2023
2%94%4%
2.77
3
Ann Hahn
0W–2L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
3
Tina Dahir
56W–60L career · 3 lines in 2023
32%68%<1%
2.56

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.