Teams

5 ACAC/Brodsky

2022 Richmond Combo Weekday Women · Richmond Combo Weekday 6.5 Women

10 players · average NTRP 3.50 / VIRGINIA

View scouting list →
Schedule7 played
2022-08-30vs 1 TDC Team BraggWon 10
W#1 DoublesChristina Aeinan Kang / Margaret Peters vs Erica Bragg / Megan Lyness1-6, 6-4, 1-0
2022-08-23vs 3 Hermitage Lines 6.5Lost 01
L#1 DoublesChristina Aeinan Kang / Daphne Cole vs Stephanie Yablonski / Sarah Martin6-4, 3-6, 1-0
2022-08-19vs 4 ACAC EmeryWon 10
W#1 DoublesLois Cooper / Mary Knick vs Alicia Watkins / Faith Kallman3-6, 6-4, 1-0
2022-08-16vs 6 KRA KirkebyWon 10
W#1 DoublesChristina Aeinan Kang / Daphne Cole vs Elizabeth Diller / Stacy Curtis6-2, 6-2
2022-08-05vs 2 ACAC LewisLost 01
L#2 DoublesHilary Brodsky / Mary Knick vs Dawn Kelsey / Irene Quilez7-5, 2-6, 0-1
2022-08-02vs 2 ACAC LewisLost 01
L#1 DoublesChristina Aeinan Kang / Judy Forbes vs Jennifer Funk / Natalie Lewis3-6, 2-6
2022-07-26vs 1 TDC Team BraggSplit 11
L#1 DoublesLois Cooper / Mary Knick vs Erica Bragg / Cynthia Mistretta4-6, 1-6
W#2 DoublesChristina Aeinan Kang / Susan Winckler vs Fran Wigner / Meigan Sullivan6-1, 7-5
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 Combo Weekday 6.5 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 3.00 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.

3.65
Christina Aeinan Kang
usually #1 Doubles 80%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published 4
3.34
Mary Knick
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
2.99
Patti Bryan
published
2.95
Hilary Brodsky
published 3.5
2.80
Margaret Peters
published
2.79
Daphne Cole
published 3
2.78
Susan Winckler
published
2.68
Kristin Gray
published
Judy Duke
published
Judy Forbes
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.

Judy Forbes + Daphne Cole123 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.

4
Christina Aeinan Kang
157W–167L career · 5 lines in 2022
13%87%<1%
3.65
3.5
Mary Knick
204W–130L career · 3 lines in 2022
<1%89%11%
3.34
Patti Bryan
16W–7L career · no lines in 2022
<1%53%47%
2.99
3.5
Hilary Brodsky
2W–8L career · no lines in 2022
66%34%<1%
2.95
Margaret Peters
8W–7L career · no lines in 2022
1%92%7%
2.80
3
Daphne Cole
20W–19L career · no lines in 2022
1%94%5%
2.79
Susan Winckler
10W–19L career · no lines in 2022
2%94%5%
2.78
Kristin Gray
5W–8L career · no lines in 2022
8%91%1%
2.68
Judy Duke
2W–3L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Judy Forbes
5W–9L career · no lines in 2022
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.