Teams

Williams/18/3.0/WD/BRCC

2023 City Championship 18 & Over - Women Day · 3.0 (18&O) Women Day

14 players · average NTRP 3.30 / LOUISIANA

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 →
Schedule
Flight standings14 teams · 3.0 (18&O) Women Day
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Cook/18/3.0/WD/BREC81301533298
2Allain/18/3.0/WD/BREC81311434340
3Williams/18/3.0/WD/BRCC81311435318
4LANASA/18/3.0/WD/CCLA72311433336
5DeJean/18/3.0/WD/SOAC63281738332
6Foust/18/3.0/WD/CCLA53192147353
7McCracken/18/3.0/WD/BREC45232252424
8Searcy/18/3.0/WD/BOC45242153404
9Blount/18/3.0/WD/UC35172352405
10Terral/18/3.0/WD/BREC36182762453
11Campesi/18/3.0/WD/BOC36143163432
12Skinner/18/3.0/WD/BRCC27182762445
13Saporito/18/3.0/WD/BREC18133268439
14Favre/18/3.0/WD/BRCC09133269477

Ordered by team wins, then losses, then sets lost — the order USTA uses to seed a flight. Individual wins are lines, not ties.

See the full flight, with every team’s record

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 2.99 estimated across 10 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.

3.84
Mary Barham
published
3.79
Drew Reilly
published 4
2.96
Carly Whatley
published 3
2.95
Meredith Manship
published
2.93
Emily Parks
published 3
2.93
Brooke Wood
published 3.5
2.74
Jennifer Maltbie
published
2.64
Stacey Fruge
published
2.59
Carter Borman
published 3
2.49
Kasey Cangelosi
published
Kaleigh Porcelli
published
Katherine Dampf
published
Kelley Buzzell
published
Lane McKnight
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.

Mary Barham + Drew Reilly3270% games+20.8% vs expected
Carly Whatley + Stacey Fruge4256% games+4.0% vs expected
Brooke Wood + Emily Parks314 matchesnot enough data
Carter Borman + Jennifer Maltbie123 matchesnot enough data
Meredith Manship + Jennifer Maltbie123 matchesnot enough data
Lane McKnight + Emily Parks303 matchesnot enough data
Kelley Buzzell + Katherine Dampf213 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.

Mary Barham
49W–17L career · no lines in 2023
<1%89%10%
3.84
4
Drew Reilly
31W–7L career · no lines in 2023
1%93%5%
3.79
3
Carly Whatley
34W–31L career · no lines in 2023
<1%61%39%
2.96
Meredith Manship
10W–23L career · no lines in 2023
66%34%<1%
2.95
3
Emily Parks
38W–25L career · no lines in 2023
<1%70%30%
2.93
3.5
Brooke Wood
21W–19L career · no lines in 2023
71%29%<1%
2.93
Jennifer Maltbie
15W–34L career · no lines in 2023
3%95%2%
2.74
Stacey Fruge
23W–33L career · no lines in 2023
13%86%<1%
2.64
3
Carter Borman
12W–14L career · no lines in 2023
24%76%<1%
2.59
Kasey Cangelosi
7W–8L career · no lines in 2023
53%47%<1%
2.49
Kaleigh Porcelli
22W–6L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Katherine Dampf
6W–3L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Kelley Buzzell
2W–3L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Lane McKnight
8W–3L career · no lines in 2023
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.