Teams

CIN Indy, Doubles 3.0 W, Bellamy (IRC-D)

Late Summer USTA Central Indiana League · CIN Late Summer 3.0 Women's Doubles

11 players · average NTRP 3.17 / CENTRAL INDIANA

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 standings10 teams · CIN Late Summer 3.0 Women's Doubles
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1CIN Indy, Doubles 3.0 W, Holden (IRC-D)5011411112
2CIN Indy, Doubles 3.0 W, Myers (IRC-D)411141074
3CIN Indy, Doubles 3.0 W, Kirch (HawGCC)419617124
4CIN Indy, Doubles 3.0 W, Lieber-Hale (IRC-D)327816122
5CIN Indy, Doubles 3.0 W, Moore (IRC-D)329617129
6CIN Indy, Doubles 3.0 W, Andersen (CRC)327818124
7CIN Indy, Doubles 3.0 W, Hinchman (CRC)238716109
8CIN Indy, Doubles 3.0 W, Bellamy (IRC-D)146921147
9CIN Indy, Doubles 3.0 W, Shippy (JCC)0541123149
10CIN Indy, Doubles 3.0 W, Senseman (HawGCC)0531226171

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 2.86 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.

3.06
Heather Bellamy
published 3.5
3.02
Sara Ingham-Straw
published
2.98
Estacia Brandenburg
published 3.5
2.97
Beth Cottingham
published 3
2.96
Jennifer Oakley
published
2.87
Sonia Powels
published
2.83
Lori Minyard
published
2.68
Haley Lawrence
published 3
2.67
Brandi Heck
published 3
2.55
Harpriya Bhagar
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.

Heather Bellamy + Sara Ingham-Straw22268% games+16.0% vs expected
Haley Lawrence + Brandi Heck3248% games+12.5% vs expected
Estacia Brandenburg + Beth Cottingham4352% games+2.7% vs expected
Lori Minyard + Estacia Brandenburg3448% games+2.2% vs expected
Haley Lawrence + Beth Cottingham11041% games−0.1% vs expected
Lori Minyard + Heather Bellamy91244% games−2.7% vs expected
Heather Bellamy + Brandi Heck3640% games−3.2% vs expected
Sara Ingham-Straw + Sonia Powels2741% games−7.0% vs expected
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.

3.5
Heather Bellamy
86W–115L career · no lines in 2023
31%69%<1%
3.06
Sara Ingham-Straw
65W–50L career · no lines in 2023
<1%43%57%
3.02
3.5
Estacia Brandenburg
55W–93L career · no lines in 2023
57%43%<1%
2.98
3
Beth Cottingham
78W–118L career · no lines in 2023
<1%60%40%
2.97
Jennifer Oakley
29W–52L career · no lines in 2023
<1%61%39%
2.96
Sonia Powels
47W–47L career · no lines in 2023
<1%85%15%
2.87
Lori Minyard
59W–100L career · no lines in 2023
1%90%10%
2.83
3
Haley Lawrence
67W–131L career · no lines in 2023
8%91%1%
2.68
3
Brandi Heck
33W–43L career · no lines in 2023
10%90%1%
2.67
3
Harpriya Bhagar
21W–107L career · no lines in 2023
35%65%<1%
2.55
Theresa - Teri HAMER
31W–91L 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.