Teams

Salisbury Andrews

2021 Richmond Adult 18 & Over Weekday Women · Richmond Weekday Adult 18 & Over Women 3.5

12 players · average NTRP 3.50 / VIRGINIA

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2021-06-25Won 10
W#2 DoublesCaroline Andrews / Alicia Watkins vs Chris Call / Sarah Wootton6-1, 4-6, 1-0
2021-06-16vs WOCC PommersheimWon 10
W#1 DoublesAlicia Watkins / Caroline Andrews vs Natalie Dunton / Sue Agee2-6, 7-6, 1-0
2021-06-09Won 10
W#1 DoublesAlicia Watkins / Caroline Andrews vs Kathryn Williams / Patricia Bell6-1, 4-6, 1-0
2021-06-02vs TDC LongWon 10
W#1 DoublesCaroline Andrews / Alicia Watkins vs Heidi Collier / Lauren Duke6-4, 4-6, 1-0
2021-05-28Lost 01
L#1 DoublesCaroline Andrews / Alicia Watkins vs Mallika Chary / Jennifer Morris3-6, 4-6
2021-05-21vs HCC StinsonWon 10
W#2 DoublesCaroline Andrews / Virginia Totaro vs Virginia Berents / Elizabeth Betz6-4, 6-4
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 Weekday Adult 18 & Over Women 3.5 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 3.17 estimated across 9 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.

3.53
Becky McNeer
published 3.5
3.40
Mandy Tornabene
published
3.38
Alicia Watkins
usually #1 Doubles 80%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published 3.5
3.19
Robin Sorensen
published
3.14
Virginia Totaro
published
3.09
3.09
Caroline Andrews
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
2.91
Laura Haskin
published
2.83
Sally Hurt
published
Lauren Cecil
published
Susan Hicklin
published
Zoe Emerson
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.

Caroline Andrews + Alicia Watkins151152% games+1.3% vs expected
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.

3.5
Becky McNeer
30W–20L career · no lines in 2021
<1%42%58%
3.53
Mandy Tornabene
15W–11L career · no lines in 2021
<1%77%23%
3.40
3.5
Alicia Watkins
218W–110L career · 5 lines in 2021
<1%83%17%
3.38
Robin Sorensen
5W–9L career · no lines in 2021
7%92%1%
3.19
Virginia Totaro
6W–4L career · no lines in 2021
15%85%<1%
3.14
Melissa Brunner-Brown
11W–22L career · no lines in 2021
24%76%<1%
3.09
3.5
Caroline Andrews
69W–67L career · 6 lines in 2021
25%75%<1%
3.09
Laura Haskin
6W–15L career · no lines in 2021
76%24%<1%
2.91
Sally Hurt
13W–22L career · no lines in 2021
90%10%<1%
2.83
Lauren Cecil
2W–1L career · no lines in 2021
not enough data
Susan Hicklin
3W–2L career · no lines in 2021
not enough data
Zoe Emerson
4W–5L career · no lines in 2021
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.