Teams

Indy C 7.5W IRCD Brown

Fall USTA Central Indiana Combo Adult · CIN Indianapolis Combo 7.5 Women, F

16 players · average NTRP 3.70 / CENTRAL INDIANA

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 →
Flight standings9 teams · CIN Indianapolis Combo 7.5 Women, F
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Indy C 7.5W IRCD Hittle000000
2Indy C 7.5W CRC Meyer000000
3Indy C 7.5W IRCD Brown000000
4Indy C 7.5W CRC Gates000000
5Indy C 7.5W IRCD Faulkenberg000000
6Indy C 7.5W PATC Olsen000000
7Indy C 7.5W IRCD Pruitt000000
8Indy C 7.5W JCC Lane000000
9Indy C 7.5W IUTC Coghlan000000

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 3.51 estimated across 15 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.

3.90
Rachel Dyer
published
Cindy Martin
published 4
3.73
Heidi Somers
published
3.71
Anne Sharp
published 4
3.66
Shelby Ackerman
published
3.64
Katelyn Marando
published
3.60
Raquel Richardson
published
3.46
Emily Demilt
published
3.45
Taylor Weitzer
published
3.44
Liz Shock
published
3.44
Michaela Hammel
published
3.42
Cari Carter
published 3.5
3.37
Carrie Frizzell
published 3.5
3.31
Mandy Prenger
published
3.27
Dahnya Chop
published 3.5
3.19
Sonia Fuller
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.

Carrie Frizzell + Anne Sharp5160% games+10.9% vs expected
Liz Shock + Anne Sharp7360% games+10.2% vs expected
Dahnya Chop + Carrie Frizzell10457% games+9.2% vs expected
Emily Demilt + Carrie Frizzell24462% games+5.9% vs expected
Shelby Ackerman + Raquel Richardson3356% games+4.3% vs expected
Heidi Somers + Shelby Ackerman4253% games+1.3% vs expected
Liz Shock + Raquel Richardson4255% games−2.3% vs expected
Heidi Somers + Rachel Dyer2343% games−9.8% 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.

Rachel Dyer
57W–37L career · no lines in 2026
<1%75%24%
3.90
4
Cindy Martin
108W–51L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
Heidi Somers
90W–97L career · no lines in 2026
<1%5%95%
3.73
4
Anne Sharp
81W–46L career · no lines in 2026
6%92%2%
3.71
Shelby Ackerman
149W–64L career · no lines in 2026
<1%<1%>99%
3.66
Katelyn Marando
38W–16L career · no lines in 2026
16%83%<1%
3.64
Raquel Richardson
74W–38L career · no lines in 2026
<1%25%75%
3.60
Emily Demilt
63W–22L career · no lines in 2026
<1%62%38%
3.46
Taylor Weitzer
31W–53L career · no lines in 2026
<1%64%36%
3.45
Liz Shock
144W–72L career · no lines in 2026
<1%65%34%
3.44
Michaela Hammel
61W–41L career · no lines in 2026
<1%67%33%
3.44
3.5
Cari Carter
45W–27L career · no lines in 2026
<1%71%28%
3.42
3.5
Carrie Frizzell
101W–35L career · no lines in 2026
<1%82%18%
3.37
Mandy Prenger
27W–39L career · no lines in 2026
1%89%9%
3.31
3.5
Dahnya Chop
122W–101L career · no lines in 2026
3%92%5%
3.27
Sonia Fuller
14W–27L career · no lines in 2026
9%90%1%
3.19

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.