Teams

Rosenfeld/18/3.0/WN/UC

2023 City Championship 18 & Over - Women Night · 3.0 (18&O) Women Night

17 players · average NTRP 3.17 / LOUISIANA

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 →
Schedule
Flight standings9 teams · 3.0 (18&O) Women Night
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1deVeer/18/3.0/WN/BREC71281228262
2Rosenfeld/18/3.0/WN/UC62291124281
3Pearson/18/3.0/WN/LSU-I53231736306
4Watson/18/3.0/WN/LSU-I53241638338
5J.SMITH/18/3.0/WN/BREC44202044350
6G.Smith/18/3.0/WN/Bocage44202044356
7LeJeune/18/3.0/WN/BREC35172349327
8Donovan/18/3.0/WN/CCL26152552404
9MAY/18/3.0/WN/BREC0843674472

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 3.07 estimated across 12 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.

3.54
Jena Vavasseur
published
3.36
Hannah Wallace
published 3.5
3.20
Jennifer Steady
published
3.20
Carmen Lavergne
published 3.5
3.15
Paige Leggett
published
3.14
3.02
Natalie Padial
published
2.95
Alexis Oliver
published 3
2.88
Missy Love
published
2.85
Jade McDowell
published 3
2.82
2.77
Claire Wicker
published 3
Cindy Ourso
published 3
Emily Richard
published 3
Lindsay Schellhaas
published
Michelle Larson
published
Teri Myers
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.

Hannah Wallace + Natalie Padial6259% games+12.1% vs expected
Catherine Rosenfeld + Alexis Oliver7261% games+7.6% vs expected
Alexis Oliver + Michelle Larson2350% games+5.9% vs expected
Alexis Oliver + Claire Wicker4257% games+2.5% vs expected
Jade McDowell + Alexis Oliver4258% games+1.9% vs expected
Catherine Rosenfeld + Carmen Lavergne12754% games+0.4% vs expected
Catherine Rosenfeld + Claire Wicker5261% games−7.8% vs expected
Catherine Rosenfeld + Natalie Padial4156% 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.

Jena Vavasseur
86W–11L career · no lines in 2023
<1%38%62%
3.54
3.5
Hannah Wallace
43W–30L career · no lines in 2023
<1%86%14%
3.36
Jennifer Steady
15W–6L career · no lines in 2023
6%93%1%
3.20
3.5
Carmen Lavergne
70W–44L career · no lines in 2023
6%93%1%
3.20
Paige Leggett
41W–20L career · no lines in 2023
12%88%<1%
3.15
3.5
Chloe Collins Freeman
28W–17L career · no lines in 2023
14%86%<1%
3.14
Natalie Padial
32W–17L career · no lines in 2023
43%57%<1%
3.02
3
Alexis Oliver
34W–24L career · no lines in 2023
<1%64%36%
2.95
Missy Love
42W–34L career · no lines in 2023
<1%82%18%
2.88
3
Jade McDowell
21W–24L career · no lines in 2023
<1%87%12%
2.85
3
Catherine Rosenfeld
81W–39L career · no lines in 2023
1%91%8%
2.82
3
Claire Wicker
36W–17L career · no lines in 2023
2%94%4%
2.77
3
Cindy Ourso
7W–9L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
3
Emily Richard
1W–2L career · type S · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Lindsay Schellhaas
10W–4L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Michelle Larson
58W–17L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Teri Myers
3W–1L career · no lines in 2023
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.