Teams

CCV Alley

2021 Richmond Adult 18 & Over Weekday Women · Richmond Weekday Adult 18 & Over Women 4.5

11 players · average NTRP 4.50 / VIRGINIA

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
2021-06-18vs HCC Fisher / HolmesSplit 11
L#1 DoublesBeth Robbins / Cindy Howell vs Maria Sorkin / Michelle Holmes4-6, 3-6
W#2 DoublesBlair Dillard / Esther Fratkin vs Kathryn Hall / Joy Lareau6-1, 6-4
2021-06-16vs WOCC CrowellWon 20
W#1 DoublesTeresa Whitworth / Beth Robbins vs Kelly Stalls / Anne Elles7-5, 7-5
W#3 DoublesJennifer Bencks / Esther Fratkin vs Jennifer Smith / Molly Dey7-6, 7-5
2021-06-14vs Southampton Lane/GreinerWon 10
W#3 DoublesTeresa Whitworth / Blair Dillard vs Emily Huang / Karna Hyman7-5, 6-4
2021-06-07vs Raintree McGarityWon 10
W#2 DoublesEsther Fratkin / Megan Hupp vs Soozie Lewis / Stacy Lukanuski2-6, 6-1, 1-0
2021-05-24vs ACAC AlleySplit 11
L#1 DoublesTeresa Whitworth / Sarah O'Neill vs Jeanine Wisor / Liesl Delisio7-6, 5-7, 1-0
W#2 DoublesBlair Dillard / Esther Fratkin vs Roxann Kiefer / Dana Wilson7-6, 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 Richmond Weekday Adult 18 & Over Women 4.5 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 4.12 estimated across 9 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.

4.71
ANN HALL
published 5
4.26
Lucy Davis
published
Alice Cooper
published 4.5
4.22
Genevieve Alley
published 4.5
4.19
Beth Robbins
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
4.15
Esther Fratkin
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 4.5
4.02
Elsie Bemiss
published 4.5
3.96
Katie Willett
published
3.84
Sarah O'Neill
published
Teresa Whitworth
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.73
Karen Williamson
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.

Teresa Whitworth + Beth Robbins224 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.

5
ANN HALL
7W–2L career · no lines in 2021
5%93%1%
4.71
Lucy Davis
5W–3L career · no lines in 2021
2%95%3%
4.26
4.5
Alice Cooper
1W–2L career · no lines in 2021
not enough data
4.5
Genevieve Alley
0W–3L career · no lines in 2021
5%94%2%
4.22
4.5
Beth Robbins
48W–53L career · 2 lines in 2021
7%92%1%
4.19
4.5
Esther Fratkin
35W–32L career · type A · 4 lines in 2021
12%87%<1%
4.15
4.5
Elsie Bemiss
1W–2L career · type S · no lines in 2021
44%56%<1%
4.02
Katie Willett
0W–5L career · no lines in 2021
63%37%<1%
3.96
Sarah O'Neill
2W–6L career · no lines in 2021
89%11%<1%
3.84
4
Teresa Whitworth
26W–39L career · 3 lines in 2021
not enough data
Karen Williamson
7W–6L career · no lines in 2021
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.