Teams

SCC Lane

2023 Richmond Adult 55 & Over Weekday Women · Richmond Adult 55 & Over 7.0 Women

14 players · average NTRP 3.25 / VIRGINIA

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2023-07-31vs Stonehenge SnavelyWon 10
W#2 DoublesCheryl Cacciotti / Karen Riley vs Jane Shives / Donna Bull6-2, 6-1
2023-06-26vs ACAC LockhartWon 10
W#1 DoublesCheryl Cacciotti / Marianne Lane vs Maureen Sisti / Linda Wood6-4, 5-2
2023-06-19vs Raintree CooperLost 01
L#1 DoublesCheryl Cacciotti / Kerry Pellicane vs Lorraine McGehee / Lisa Harmon3-6, 2-6
2023-06-12vs TDC LongLost 01
L#1 DoublesCheryl Cacciotti / Kristin Kim vs Susan Long / Sheri Carlyle6-4, 4-6, 0-1
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 Richmond Adult 55 & Over 7.0 Women 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 3.20 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.

3.56
Heather Benedetti
published
3.44
Marianne Lane
published
3.25
Kristin Kim
published
3.19
Robin Sorensen
published
3.16
Kerry Pellicane
published
3.14
Virginia Totaro
published
3.08
3.06
Cheryl Cacciotti
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3
3.05
Annmarie Strachan
published 3.5
3.04
Stacey Piotrowski
published
Dorothy Hillgrove
published
Joanne Kearns
published
Nancy Sullivan
published
Susan Gregory
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.

Heather Benedetti + Kristin Kim13264% games+7.7% vs expected
Stacey Piotrowski + Virginia Totaro3250% gamesnot enough data
Melissa Brunner-Brown + Annmarie Strachan0537% gamesnot enough data
Stacey Piotrowski + Melissa Brunner-Brown224 matchesnot enough data
Nancy Sullivan + Robin Sorensen123 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.

Heather Benedetti
30W–10L career · no lines in 2023
<1%34%66%
3.56
Marianne Lane
16W–7L career · no lines in 2023
<1%66%34%
3.44
Kristin Kim
19W–12L career · no lines in 2023
4%93%3%
3.25
Robin Sorensen
5W–8L career · no lines in 2023
9%90%1%
3.19
Kerry Pellicane
2W–1L career · no lines in 2023
13%86%1%
3.16
Virginia Totaro
6W–5L career · no lines in 2023
16%84%1%
3.14
Melissa Brunner-Brown
11W–22L career · no lines in 2023
28%71%<1%
3.08
3
Cheryl Cacciotti
67W–85L career · 4 lines in 2023
<1%33%67%
3.06
3.5
Annmarie Strachan
8W–12L career · no lines in 2023
37%63%<1%
3.05
Stacey Piotrowski
10W–12L career · no lines in 2023
39%61%<1%
3.04
Dorothy Hillgrove
4W–6L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Joanne Kearns
2W–2L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Nancy Sullivan
2W–4L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Susan Gregory
0W–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.