Teams

Smart Aces

2025 Montgomery Adult 40 & Over · Montgomery Adult 40 & Over 4.5 Women

20 players · average NTRP 4.44 / MARYLAND

View scouting list →
Schedule10 played
2025-04-01vs Different StrokesWon 20
W#1 SinglesKanika Sabor vs N/A6-0, 6-0
W#2 DoublesLiz Christensen / Natalie Eatedali vs Margie Davis / Helen Shepherd1-6, 7-6, 1-0
2025-03-26vs Breaking PointLost 02
L#1 DoublesNatalie Eatedali / Laurie Cohen vs Verna Flemming / Eboni Lance1-6, 6-4, 0-1
L#2 DoublesKim Miller / Margarita Baldwin vs Carol Besse / Pamela Dean4-6, 4-6
2025-03-16vs Breaking PointWon 10
W#2 DoublesKim Miller / Margarita Baldwin vs Lisa Roy / Jaime Lewis6-3, 7-5
2025-03-10vs Different StrokesWon 10
W#3 DoublesLiz Christensen / Kanika Sabor vs Elissa Lei / Karina Walters6-4, 6-2
2025-03-07vs Breaking PointSplit 11
W#1 DoublesNatalie Eatedali / Laurie Cohen vs Wendy Heger / Carol Besse4-6, 6-4, 1-0
L#3 DoublesMelissa Phillips / Kanika Sabor vs Vicki Williamson / Pamela Dean3-6, 6-4, 0-1
2025-03-01vs Different StrokesLost 01
L#3 DoublesKim Miller / Liz Christensen vs Jane Simoni / Karina Walters1-6, 0-6
2025-02-25vs Breaking PointLost 01
L#2 DoublesLaurie Cohen / Kanika Sabor vs Vicki Williamson / Eboni Lance4-6, 4-6
2025-02-15vs Breaking PointWon 20
W#2 DoublesKerrie Jenkins / Liz Christensen vs Wendy Heger / Jaime Lewis7-5, 6-4
W#3 DoublesKim Miller / Margarita Baldwin vs Vicki Williamson / Kasey Kinney6-7, 6-3, 1-0
2025-01-28vs Different StrokesWon 10
W#1 DoublesJennifer McGraw / Natalie Eatedali vs Jane Simoni / Karina Walters7-6, 6-1
2025-01-23vs Breaking PointWon 10
W#3 DoublesKanika Sabor / Liz Christensen vs Verna Flemming / Kristin Quackenbush6-2, 6-0
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 Montgomery Adult 40 & Over 4.5 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 4.21 estimated across 17 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.

4.49
Leah Noonan
published
4.42
Heather Carr
published 4.5
4.41
Lily Kosegarten
published
4.40
Jennifer Holliday
published
4.39
Jennifer McGraw
published
4.35
Natalie Eatedali
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 4.5
4.26
Simone Feldman
published
4.18
Dana MacHer
published 4.5
4.18
Michele Brammer
published
4.17
Alexei Haughom
published 4.5
4.17
Kanika Sabor
usually #1 Doubles 44%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 4.5
4.11
Liz Christensen
usually #1 Doubles 55%, also #3 Doubles 27% · published 4.5
4.10
Janet Szamosszegi
published
4.04
Alison Bailey
published 4.5
4.03
Laurie Cohen
published
3.99
Margarita Baldwin
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.90
Kim Miller
published
Kerrie Jenkins
published
Laura Smith
published
Wendy Carey
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.

Janet Szamosszegi + Natalie Eatedali4177% games+16.3% vs expected
Simone Feldman + Alison Bailey2551% games+11.6% vs expected
Jennifer McGraw + Natalie Eatedali7260% games+6.8% vs expected
Natalie Eatedali + Leah Noonan3355% games+5.9% vs expected
Liz Christensen + Kanika Sabor43966% games+5.2% vs expected
Kim Miller + Margarita Baldwin6263% games+1.6% vs expected
Simone Feldman + Wendy Carey4256% games−3.1% vs expected
Natalie Eatedali + Laurie Cohen224 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.

Leah Noonan
50W–17L career · no lines in 2025
<1%54%46%
4.49
4.5
Heather Carr
40W–17L career · no lines in 2025
<1%72%28%
4.42
Lily Kosegarten
16W–1L career · no lines in 2025
<1%75%25%
4.41
Jennifer Holliday
31W–9L career · no lines in 2025
<1%78%22%
4.40
Jennifer McGraw
16W–3L career · no lines in 2025
<1%81%19%
4.39
4.5
Natalie Eatedali
125W–47L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%88%12%
4.35
Simone Feldman
79W–66L career · no lines in 2025
2%95%3%
4.26
4.5
Dana MacHer
91W–44L career · no lines in 2025
8%91%1%
4.18
Michele Brammer
9W–8L career · no lines in 2025
8%91%1%
4.18
4.5
Alexei Haughom
4W–7L career · no lines in 2025
9%90%1%
4.17
4.5
Kanika Sabor
128W–50L career · 9 lines in 2025
9%90%1%
4.17
4.5
Liz Christensen
123W–44L career · 11 lines in 2025
21%79%<1%
4.11
Janet Szamosszegi
11W–9L career · no lines in 2025
23%77%<1%
4.10
4.5
Alison Bailey
23W–23L career · no lines in 2025
37%63%<1%
4.04
Laurie Cohen
4W–7L career · no lines in 2025
41%59%<1%
4.03
4
Margarita Baldwin
449W–127L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%54%46%
3.99
Kim Miller
42W–15L career · no lines in 2025
<1%78%22%
3.90
Kerrie Jenkins
0W–2L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Laura Smith
1W–1L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Wendy Carey
7W–2L career · no lines 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.