Teams

EFSC - Taylor

2025 Brevard Trilevel · 4.0

9 players · average NTRP 3.75 / REGION_4

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2025-07-27vs Viera Regional Park - HuangWon 10
W#2 DoublesKimberly Kressler / Terra Hovan vs Lori Abbott / Danielle Hyatt1-6, 7-6, 1-0
W#1 DoublesMonika Bandi / Miranda Jackson vs Gillian Dionne / Heather Schleicher6-4, 7-6
2025-07-06vs EGYC - BoydLost 02
L#1 DoublesMiranda Jackson / Nancy van Suetendael vs Alyssa Boyd / Marcia Lusk3-6, 4-6
L#2 DoublesKerry Sawyer / Kimberly Kressler vs Tracy Jacobus / Marja Welsh2-6, 4-6
2025-06-22vs Viera Regional Park - HuangWon 10
W#1 DoublesNancy van Suetendael / Jan Johnson vs Naomi Coleman / Sara Hatfield4-6, 6-1, 1-0
2025-06-15vs Suntree - SaundersSplit 11
L#1 DoublesNancy van Suetendael / Jan Johnson vs Amira Tolles / Christina Carver3-6, 0-6
W#2 DoublesKimberly Kressler / Terra Hovan vs Dana Saunders / Sandra Rowe6-7, 6-3, 1-0
2025-06-01vs EGYC - BoydSplit 11
W#1 DoublesMonika Bandi / Nancy van Suetendael vs Linda Stout / Mary McCarthy6-2, 6-4
L#2 DoublesTerra Hovan / Diana Fuchs vs Tracy Jacobus / Cheryl Wadsworth0-6, 2-6
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 4.0 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 3.18 estimated across 8 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.

3.91
Monika Bandi
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.49
Nancy van Suetendael
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 4
3.31
Terra Hovan
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.21
Kerry Sawyer
published
3.18
Kimberly Kressler
usually #1 Doubles 57%, also #2 Doubles 43% · published 3.5
3.09
Janine Brunkala
published
2.70
Ruthan Tattersall
published
2.56
Katherine Hingle
published
Miranda Jackson
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.

Ruthan Tattersall + Katherine Hingle4257% games+6.1% vs expected
Kimberly Kressler + Terra Hovan3343% gamesnot enough data
Kerry Sawyer + Ruthan Tattersall213 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
Monika Bandi
45W–34L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%75%24%
3.91
4
Nancy van Suetendael
27W–65L career · type A · 10 lines in 2025
52%48%<1%
3.49
3.5
Terra Hovan
108W–71L career · 3 lines in 2025
1%92%7%
3.31
Kerry Sawyer
39W–11L career · no lines in 2025
<1%6%94%
3.21
3.5
Kimberly Kressler
70W–76L career · 7 lines in 2025
9%91%1%
3.18
Janine Brunkala
3W–5L career · no lines in 2025
24%75%<1%
3.09
Ruthan Tattersall
13W–11L career · no lines in 2025
6%93%1%
2.70
Katherine Hingle
6W–10L career · no lines in 2025
31%69%<1%
2.56
Miranda Jackson
15W–5L career · no lines in 2025
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.