Teams

17 TDC Team Causey

2022 Richmond Adult 18 & Over Weekend · Richmond Adult 18 & Over 3.5 Women

15 players · average NTRP 3.30 / VIRGINIA

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
2022-06-04vs 4 Westwood WestLost 01
L#1 DoublesMegan Lyness / Elaine McCormick vs Christine Albrecht / Patricia Bishop2-6, 5-7
2022-05-28vs 3 KRA Green/Turner Smash GirlsLost 01
L#1 DoublesElaine McCormick / Megan Lyness vs Davin Jackson / Laurie Barnes3-6, 6-4, 0-1
2022-05-21vs 24 Lakeside Park MayWon 10
W#2 DoublesMegan Lyness / Elaine McCormick vs Jessica Stephens / Kathy Laing6-2, 6-0
2022-05-15vs 20 Southampton BrownLost 01
L#2 DoublesMegan Lyness / Elaine McCormick vs Margaret Duke / Beth Stafford5-7, 6-7
2022-04-02vs 10 ACAC AndersonWon 10
W#3 DoublesMegan Lyness / Brenda Ackerman vs Alice Albright / Amy Romero6-3, 6-0
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 Adult 18 & Over 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 2.97 estimated across 10 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.

3.71
Megan Lyness
usually #2 Doubles 40%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published
Anna Gibellato
published 3.5
Brenda Ackerman
published 3.5
Cris Latief
published 3.5
3.19
Jamie Stokes
published 3.5
3.17
Cynthia Mistretta
published 3.5
3.02
Annette Vignone
published 3.5
2.90
Katheryn Enters
published
2.89
Kumiko Suzuki
published
2.87
Eliza Causey
published 3
Deb Holden
published 3
2.70
Becky Harper
published 3
2.68
Robin Zachwieja
published
2.56
Elaine McCormick
published 3
Stephanie Cametas
published
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.

Megan Lyness
106W–46L career · 5 lines in 2022
5%93%1%
3.71
3.5
Anna Gibellato
2W–2L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
3.5
Brenda Ackerman
1W–1L career · type S · no lines in 2022
not enough data
3.5
Cris Latief
2W–0L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
3.5
Jamie Stokes
18W–10L career · no lines in 2022
7%92%1%
3.19
3.5
Cynthia Mistretta
6W–11L career · no lines in 2022
10%89%1%
3.17
3.5
Annette Vignone
2W–6L career · no lines in 2022
43%57%<1%
3.02
Katheryn Enters
2W–8L career · no lines in 2022
77%23%<1%
2.90
Kumiko Suzuki
3W–7L career · no lines in 2022
80%20%<1%
2.89
3
Eliza Causey
22W–13L career · no lines in 2022
<1%84%15%
2.87
3
Deb Holden
0W–1L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
3
Becky Harper
12W–14L career · no lines in 2022
6%93%1%
2.70
Robin Zachwieja
7W–7L career · no lines in 2022
9%91%1%
2.68
3
Elaine McCormick
3W–16L career · no lines in 2022
32%67%<1%
2.56
Stephanie Cametas
10W–2L 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.