Teams

3FAC-STEINER WOMEN HIGH 50 45 40 TRI SEM

2025 bSEM TRI-LEVEL - AUGUST · 2025 WOMEN Tri-Level Aug High 5.0, 4.5, 4.0 SEM

16 players · average NTRP 4.46 / S.E. MICHIGAN

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 →
Schedule6 played
W#1 DoublesDaria Haupt / Elena Strakhova vs Ayumi Sasaki / Colleen O'Brien6-1, 6-3
W#2 DoublesTrish Keranen / Kendall Payne vs Jessica Kruczek / Stephanie Schulte6-2, 6-4
L#3 DoublesLaure Housey / Chelsea Passmore vs Jillian Brooks / Marcia Varner4-6, 5-7
W#1 DoublesDaria Haupt / Elena Strakhova vs Ayumi Sasaki / Carla Jewell6-4, 6-3
L#2 DoublesAlissa VanderKooi / Kendall Payne vs Stephanie Schulte / Emily Radner3-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesNury Steiner / Chelsea Passmore vs Jill Pietrowsky / Samantha Wagner3-6, 3-6
L#1 DoublesElena Strakhova / Robin Rogers vs Carla Jewell / Nynke van der Goot6-7, 3-6
W#2 DoublesTrish Keranen / Sullivan Patel vs Shannon Babcock / Stephanie Schulte6-3, 6-3
W#3 DoublesSarah McCarthy / Lauren Rakolta vs Amy Gonte / Samantha Wagner6-3, 3-6, 1-0
W#1 DoublesEva Stevanovic / Daria Haupt vs Carla Jewell / Nynke van der Goot7-5, 6-4
W#2 DoublesAlissa VanderKooi / Alison Kirschenbaum vs Jessica Kruczek / Emily Radner7-5, 6-1
W#3 DoublesMadoka Minamoto / Sarah McCarthy vs Amy Gonte / Jillian Brooks7-6, 4-6, 1-0
L#1 DoublesEva Stevanovic / Elena Strakhova vs Ayumi Sasaki / Nynke van der Goot3-6, 6-1, 0-1
W#2 DoublesTrish Keranen / Kendall Payne vs Jessica Kruczek / N Maxine Kennebrew6-1, 6-1
W#3 DoublesNury Steiner / Lauren Rakolta vs Jill Pietrowsky / Kate Gavagan6-2, 4-6, 1-0
L#1 DoublesElena Strakhova / Robin Rogers vs Colleen O'Brien / Carla Jewell3-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesKendall Payne / Alison Kirschenbaum vs McCall Monte / Shannon Babcock4-6, 2-6
W#3 DoublesMadoka Minamoto / Laure Housey vs Kate Gavagan / Marcia Varner6-1, 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 standings2 teams · 2025 WOMEN Tri-Level Aug High 5.0, 4.5, 4.0 SEM
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
13FAC-STEINER WOMEN HIGH 50 45 40 TRI SEM4211717154
24EAST-MONTE WOMEN HIGH 50 45 40 TRI SEM2471123183

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 4.06 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.

Daria Haupt
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 5.5
Elena Strakhova
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 5
Eva Stevanovic
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 5
4.47
Trish Keranen
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
4.45
Alison Kirschenbaum
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
4.41
Kendall Payne
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
4.37
Alissa VanderKooi
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
3.94
Chelsea Passmore
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.85
Madoka Minamoto
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.83
Kimberly Nylen
published 4
3.82
Laure Housey
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.80
Nury Steiner
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.64
Lauren Rakolta
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Robin Rogers
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Sarah McCarthy
published
Sullivan Patel
usually #2 Doubles 100% · 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.

Trish Keranen + Kendall Payne22465% games+6.9% vs expected
Alissa VanderKooi + Kendall Payne12359% games+6.8% vs expected
Trish Keranen + Alison Kirschenbaum411163% games+4.3% vs expected
Alison Kirschenbaum + Kendall Payne9657% games−4.5% vs expected
Madoka Minamoto + Nury Steiner4450% games−4.7% vs expected
Kimberly Nylen + Trish Keranen4364% gamesnot enough data
Robin Rogers + Elena Strakhova2351% gamesnot enough data
Trish Keranen + Laure Housey4166% 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.

5.5
Daria Haupt
34W–7L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
5
Elena Strakhova
61W–48L career · 5 lines in 2025
not enough data
5
Eva Stevanovic
32W–12L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
4.5
Trish Keranen
206W–79L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%59%41%
4.47
4.5
Alison Kirschenbaum
212W–84L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%64%36%
4.45
4.5
Kendall Payne
115W–52L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%75%24%
4.41
4.5
Alissa VanderKooi
99W–66L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%85%15%
4.37
4
Chelsea Passmore
89W–53L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%67%33%
3.94
4
Madoka Minamoto
78W–61L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%87%13%
3.85
4
Kimberly Nylen
62W–50L career · no lines in 2025
1%90%9%
3.83
4
Laure Housey
188W–116L career · 2 lines in 2025
1%91%8%
3.82
4
Nury Steiner
185W–151L career · 2 lines in 2025
1%93%6%
3.80
Lauren Rakolta
65W–40L career · 2 lines in 2025
14%86%<1%
3.64
Robin Rogers
2W–6L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Sarah McCarthy
14W–6L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Sullivan Patel
17W–3L career · 1 line in 2025
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.