Teams

BCC BLUE

2022 CTA WOMEN'S SUMMER DAYTIME - DEN · WOMEN 3.0 - SUMMER DAYTIME

10 players · average NTRP 3.00 / 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 →
Schedule4 played
2022-09-12vs NJ BLUELost 03
L#1 DoublesLaura Studebaker / Dana Bickham vs Tara Hammar / Laura Garrido5-7, 2-6
L#1 SinglesMelissa Ondash vs Stephanie Shawn2-6, 0-6
L#2 DoublesBarbara Stager / Susan Hirano vs Kerry Mobley / Mollie Toth2-6, 6-2, 0-1
2022-09-09vs TTA REDWon 20
W#1 DoublesLaura Studebaker / Annette Wright vs Anne Shaw / Michelle Templeton6-0, 6-4
W#2 DoublesSusan Hirano / CAROLYN PAUL vs Christine Everson / Kelly Horace7-5, 6-4
2022-08-29vs CVTA REDLost 01
L#1 SinglesMelissa Ondash vs Louise Fowler4-6, 2-6
2022-08-08vs RCC REDWon 10
W#2 DoublesLaura Studebaker / CAROLYN PAUL vs Wendy Atkinson / Anne Cadden6-2, 7-6
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 3.0 - SUMMER DAYTIME 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 2.77 estimated across 5 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.

2.96
Amy Nichols
published 3
2.92
Susan Hirano
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
Annette Wright
published 3
Barbara Stager
published 3
Dana Bickham
published 3
Debbie Day
published 3
2.72
Melissa Ondash
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 3
2.68
Laura Studebaker
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.57
CAROLYN PAUL
published 3
Justine Boston
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.

Laura Studebaker + Melissa Ondash4162% games+15.2% vs expected
Debbie Day + Barbara Stager6166% games+14.5% vs expected
Laura Studebaker + Annette Wright7165% games+9.4% vs expected
Susan Hirano + Melissa Ondash13164% games+7.1% vs expected
Debbie Day + Melissa Ondash2748% games+0.4% vs expected
Amy Nichols + Justine Boston5357% games+0.3% vs expected
Amy Nichols + Dana Bickham4155% games−5.1% vs expected
Susan Hirano + Barbara Stager3263% gamesnot 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.

3
Amy Nichols
64W–22L career · no lines in 2022
<1%63%37%
2.96
3
Susan Hirano
80W–45L career · 2 lines in 2022
<1%72%28%
2.92
3
Annette Wright
25W–11L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
3
Barbara Stager
18W–12L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
3
Dana Bickham
31W–16L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
3
Debbie Day
28W–20L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
3
Melissa Ondash
57W–47L career · 2 lines in 2022
4%94%2%
2.72
3
Laura Studebaker
96W–48L career · 3 lines in 2022
9%91%1%
2.68
3
CAROLYN PAUL
13W–16L career · no lines in 2022
30%70%<1%
2.57
Justine Boston
19W–10L career · no lines in 2022
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.