Teams

FLYHS SAXBY

2021 CTA WOMEN'S DAYTIME DOUBLES - SOCO · WOMEN 4.0 - DAYTIME - SOCO

9 players · average NTRP 4.00 / COLORADO

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 →
Schedule3 played
2021-06-10vs PBTC HENSONWon 10
W#1 DoublesAmy Saxby / Chelsey Wright vs Leah Ann Tucker / Paula Henson3-6, 6-3, 1-0
2021-06-03vs LTFCS ORTONURBINAWon 20
W#1 DoublesJamie Roach / Kristi Creps vs Deborah Scruggs / Patricia Day6-2, 6-3
W#2 DoublesAmy Saxby / Chelsey Wright vs Anna Bordelon / Ann Grumann6-4, 6-3
2021-05-13vs CSRC SIEGALLost 02
L#1 DoublesJamie Roach / Kristi Creps vs Nancy Siegel / Roni Schlagel1-6, 6-7
L#2 DoublesAmy Saxby / Chelsey Wright vs Patty Carpenter / Kady Hommel2-6, 1-6
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 WOMEN 4.0 - DAYTIME - SOCO 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 3.81 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.

3.95
Jamie Roach
published 4
3.95
Amy Saxby
published 4
3.92
Leslie Jaworowski
published
3.79
Chelsey Wright
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.73
Kristi Creps
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.52
Catherine Mast
published 4
Diane Bean
published
Kelly Calabrese
published
Martina Levkus
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.

Catherine Mast + Amy Saxby3260% games+5.9% vs expected
Jamie Roach + Kristi Creps14556% games+2.8% vs expected
Chelsey Wright + Amy Saxby19859% games+2.1% vs expected
Kristi Creps + Chelsey Wright4452% games−2.7% vs expected
Kristi Creps + Amy Saxby224 matchesnot enough data
Catherine Mast + Chelsey Wright213 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
Jamie Roach
39W–14L career · no lines in 2021
<1%65%35%
3.95
4
Amy Saxby
57W–28L career · no lines in 2021
<1%65%35%
3.95
Leslie Jaworowski
53W–15L career · no lines in 2021
<1%73%27%
3.92
4
Chelsey Wright
54W–40L career · 3 lines in 2021
1%93%6%
3.79
4
Kristi Creps
59W–51L career · 2 lines in 2021
4%94%2%
3.73
4
Catherine Mast
29W–45L career · no lines in 2021
43%57%<1%
3.52
Diane Bean
0W–2L career · no lines in 2021
not enough data
Kelly Calabrese
5W–13L career · no lines in 2021
not enough data
Martina Levkus
52W–18L career · no lines in 2021
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.