Teams

NJ GREEN

2024 TRIO - DEN · WOMEN 4.0 - TRIO

7 players · average NTRP 4.17 / 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 →
Schedule5 played
2024-04-27vs CP GREENWon 10
W#1 DoublesEmese Nagy / Macy Bauerle vs Cameron Passmore / Elizabeth Bernadette6-1, 6-2
2024-04-20vs BP GREENSplit 11
W#1 DoublesEmese Nagy / Alexis Klas vs Victoria Williams / Deanna Ford Overdyke6-1, 6-1
L#2 DoublesEmily Markwell / Macy Bauerle vs Leslie Lane / Alexandra Wingert6-3, 3-6, 0-1
2024-04-18vs CP GREENWon 10
W#1 DoublesEmily Markwell / Alexis Klas vs Claudia Pillow / Sissel Eckenhausen6-1, 6-0
2024-04-13vs NJ BLUEWon 20
W#1 DoublesEmese Nagy / Macy Bauerle vs Angela Harper / Beth McCarty6-1, 6-2
W#2 DoublesEmily Markwell / Lauren Rivas vs Miki Aylesworth / Megan Shibao6-1, 6-3
2024-04-05vs BP GREENWon 20
W#1 DoublesEmily Markwell / Emese Nagy vs Leslie Lane / Gabriela Flora6-2, 6-1
W#1 SinglesMacy Bauerle vs Deanna Ford Overdyke6-0, 6-2
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 - TRIO 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 3.99 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.

4.26
Emily Markwell
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4.5
4.21
Emese Nagy
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
4.04
Alexis Klas
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.92
Macy Bauerle
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #1 Singles 25% · published 4
3.77
Verhonica Hirst
published 4
Anna Thielen
published 4
3.73
Lauren Rivas
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.

Verhonica Hirst + Emese Nagy5262% games+10.4% vs expected
Macy Bauerle + Emese Nagy7066% games+8.2% vs expected
Emese Nagy + Emily Markwell19563% games+6.4% vs expected
Macy Bauerle + Verhonica Hirst4159% games−1.4% vs expected
Alexis Klas + Emese Nagy5067% gamesnot enough data
Macy Bauerle + Alexis Klas404 matchesnot enough data
Alexis Klas + Emily Markwell404 matchesnot enough data
Macy Bauerle + Lauren Rivas303 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.

4.5
Emily Markwell
108W–32L career · 4 lines in 2024
2%94%3%
4.26
4.5
Emese Nagy
206W–39L career · 4 lines in 2024
5%93%1%
4.21
4
Alexis Klas
71W–15L career · 2 lines in 2024
<1%38%62%
4.04
4
Macy Bauerle
109W–34L career · 4 lines in 2024
<1%73%27%
3.92
4
Verhonica Hirst
98W–48L career · no lines in 2024
2%94%4%
3.77
4
Anna Thielen
4W–5L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Lauren Rivas
84W–43L career · no lines in 2024
4%94%2%
3.73

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.