Teams

RCAA-Zhou 18s 2.5 DW

2026 bSEM ADULT 18 & OVER DAY WOMEN · 2.5 WOMEN THUR AM SEM

7 players · average NTRP 2.50 / S.E. MICHIGAN

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 →
Schedule7 played
2026-07-09vs LIB-Beals 18s 2.5 DWWon 10
W#1 DoublesRachel Ufer / Robin Birdsong vs Michelle Chien / Michelle Merkel6-1, 6-1
2026-06-18vs LIB-Beals 18s 2.5 DWLost 01
L#1 DoublesMonica Rosen / Carolyn Loh vs Michelle Merkel / Michelle Chien1-6, 1-6
2026-06-11vs BT-Vani 18s 2.5 DW FLost 01
L#2 DoublesSasha Zhou / Christina Laitner vs Maya Okka / Sarah Smith4-6, 1-6
2026-06-05vs LIB-Beals 18s 2.5 DWWon 10
W#1 DoublesRachel Ufer / Carolyn Loh vs Patricia Beals / Marie Hooper7-6, 0-6, 1-0
2026-06-04vs AAREC-Miller 18s 2.5 DWWon 10
W#1 DoublesCarolyn Loh / Rachel Ufer vs Yuhong Zhang / Kelly Demske7-5, 6-3
2026-05-21vs BT-Vani 18s 2.5 DW FWon 20
W#1 DoublesRachel Ufer / Carolyn Loh vs Jennifer Gagnon / Gayle Brooks6-2, 6-1
W#2 DoublesAshley Bucsek / Cara Orfield vs Elaine Atallah / Maya Okka6-2, 6-3
2026-05-14vs AAREC-Miller 18s 2.5 DWLost 12
L#1 DoublesCarolyn Loh / Sasha Zhou vs Jing Bai / Kelly Demske4-6, 6-4, 0-1
W#1 SinglesElizabeth Levesque vs Meredith Miller6-1, 6-2
L#2 DoublesMonica Rosen / Mary Haas vs Danyelle Reynolds / Yuhong Zhang1-6, 3-6
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 standings4 teams · 2.5 WOMEN THUR AM SEM
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1AAREC-Miller 18s 2.5 DW8020412160
2LIB-Beals 18s 2.5 DW44121226188
3RCAA-Zhou 18s 2.5 DW35111328214
4BT-Vani 18s 2.5 DW F0621632205

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 2.31 estimated across 5 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.

2.50
Robin Birdsong
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.41
Rachel Ufer
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.36
Carolyn Loh
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 2.5
2.30
Elizabeth Levesque
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 2.5
Cara Orfield
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 2.5
Christina Laitner
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 2.5
1.97
Monica Rosen
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · 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.

Carolyn Loh + Rachel Ufer6065% gamesnot enough data
Carolyn Loh + Monica Rosen123 matchesnot enough data
Rachel Ufer + Elizabeth Levesque033 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.

Robin Birdsong
13W–13L career · 1 line in 2026
0%50%50%
2.50
Rachel Ufer
9W–6L career · 4 lines in 2026
0%76%24%
2.41
2.5
Carolyn Loh
59W–66L career · 5 lines in 2026
0%87%13%
2.36
2.5
Elizabeth Levesque
11W–9L career · 1 line in 2026
0%94%6%
2.30
2.5
Cara Orfield
3W–2L career · type S · 1 line in 2026
not enough data
2.5
Christina Laitner
0W–3L career · type S · 1 line in 2026
not enough data
Monica Rosen
4W–13L career · 2 lines in 2026
0%>99%<1%
1.97

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.