Teams

9 MRTC Rally Roses - Joyal

2025 Richmond Singles · Richmond Singles 3.5 Women

6 players · average NTRP 3.50 / VIRGINIA

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2025-11-05Won 10
W#1 SinglesNatalie Taylor vs Sarah Johnson6-1, 6-0
2025-11-04vs 17 ACAC HolahanWon 20
W#1 SinglesNatalie Taylor vs Amy Golden6-1, 6-3
W#2 SinglesAudrey Smith vs Sandra Holahan6-2, 6-1
2025-10-23vs 11 KRA Topspinners - DanielWon 10
W#1 SinglesAudrey Smith vs Lauren Turner6-4, 6-4
2025-10-20vs 7 SCC Gilbert SinglesWon 20
W#1 SinglesAudrey Smith vs Brooke Gilbert2-6, 6-0, 1-0
W#2 SinglesKatey Gardner vs Sally Hurt6-1, 6-1
2025-10-15vs 15 Herm- AloufSplit 11
W#1 SinglesNatalie Taylor vs Sarah Martin6-1, 6-3
L#2 SinglesAudrey Smith vs Beth Stinson3-6, 4-6
W#1 SinglesNatalie Taylor vs Rebecca Cassilly6-3, 6-0
L#2 SinglesAudrey Smith vs Amanda Rice6-3, 0-6, 0-1
2025-10-02vs 13 Burkwood - CookSplit 11
W#1 SinglesNatalie Taylor vs Elisa Grotjohn6-2, 6-2
L#2 SinglesAudrey Smith vs Yen Huynh4-6, 2-6
2025-09-30vs 5 Westwood BurkeLost 02
L#1 SinglesAudrey Smith vs Margaret Burke2-6, 6-3, 1-0
L#2 SinglesKatey Gardner vs Kacie Painter4-6, 2-6
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 Singles 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 3.30 estimated across 6 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.

3.56
Natalie Taylor
usually #1 Singles 100% · published
3.47
Samantha Chin
published
3.45
Katey Gardner
usually #2 Singles 100% · published
3.12
Audrey Smith
usually #2 Singles 57%, also #1 Singles 43% · published 3.5
3.11
Autumn Joyal
published 3.5
3.10
Liz Wiebe
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.

Katey Gardner + Autumn Joyal1540% games−9.9% vs expected
Natalie Taylor + Katey Gardner303 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.

Natalie Taylor
39W–28L career · 5 lines in 2025
33%67%<1%
3.56
Samantha Chin
7W–4L career · no lines in 2025
<1%58%42%
3.47
Katey Gardner
26W–23L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%63%37%
3.45
3.5
Audrey Smith
37W–28L career · 7 lines in 2025
20%80%<1%
3.12
3.5
Autumn Joyal
14W–24L career · no lines in 2025
22%77%<1%
3.11
Liz Wiebe
17W–6L career · no lines in 2025
<1%24%76%
3.10

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.