Teams

Keswick-Holt

2024 Charlottesville Tri-Level 18 & Over · Charlottesville Tri-Level 4.5, 4.0, 3.5 Women

12 players · average NTRP 3.50 / VIRGINIA

View scouting list →
Schedule7 played
2024-09-17vs BHSC Gone Country-JohnsonWon 10
W#1 DoublesMerrily Main D'Arpino / Laura Leetzow vs Pascale Hapgood / Grace Bartini6-4, 6-0
2024-09-12vs CHARLOTTESVILLE - BazydloWon 10
W#1 DoublesLaura Leetzow / Merrily Main D'Arpino vs Beth Hollen / Esther Bausserman6-3, 6-3
2024-09-10vs Farmington-WorthWon 10
W#1 DoublesMerrily Main D'Arpino / Maggie Moore vs Penny Ward / Elizabeth Pollard6-1, 3-6, 1-0
2024-08-29Won 10
W#1 DoublesMerrily Main D'Arpino / Laura Leetzow vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2024-08-27vs Glenmore Green-LongWon 10
W#1 DoublesVirginia Bowie / Merrily Main D'Arpino vs Debbie Lonnquest / Patti Rowe6-2, 6-1
2024-08-20vs BHSC-BlemkerLost 01
L#1 DoublesMerrily Main D'Arpino / Melissa Zeller vs Allison Ewing / Christina Beverage2-6, 2-6
2024-08-12vs Tri To Beat Us-DiVitaLost 01
L#1 DoublesMerrily Main D'Arpino / Laura Leetzow vs Elizabeth Gunnels / Mary Primm2-6, 6-2, 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 Charlottesville Tri-Level 4.5, 4.0, 3.5 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 3.55 estimated across 8 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.

4.16
Erin Waters
published
3.78
Susie Chung
published
3.77
Lisa Jett
published
3.67
Kristin Carter
published
3.50
Maggie Moore
published
3.25
Nancy Ferguson
published
3.14
Merrily Main D'Arpino
usually #1 Doubles 58%, also #3 Doubles 42% · published 3.5
3.10
Melissa Zeller
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
Elizabeth Ratcliffe
published
Ellen Markowitz
published
Janie Shrader
published
Tia Schurecht
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.

Merrily Main D'Arpino + Melissa Zeller2441% 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.

Erin Waters
7W–7L career · no lines in 2024
13%86%1%
4.16
Susie Chung
7W–7L career · no lines in 2024
2%92%6%
3.78
Lisa Jett
7W–5L career · no lines in 2024
3%92%5%
3.77
Kristin Carter
11W–8L career · no lines in 2024
12%87%1%
3.67
Maggie Moore
9W–4L career · no lines in 2024
49%51%<1%
3.50
Nancy Ferguson
4W–0L career · no lines in 2024
97%3%<1%
3.25
3.5
Merrily Main D'Arpino
150W–107L career · 12 lines in 2024
15%84%1%
3.14
3.5
Melissa Zeller
121W–104L career · 4 lines in 2024
24%76%<1%
3.10
Elizabeth Ratcliffe
0W–1L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Ellen Markowitz
7W–2L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Janie Shrader
1W–2L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Tia Schurecht
1W–0L career · no lines in 2024
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.