Teams

E.McAllister

2023 Cap Adult 18 & Over · 4.0 Women

12 players · average NTRP 3.50 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule7 played
2023-05-20vs L.Hatlen 18Won 10
W#1 DoublesErin McAllister / Dara Haney vs Lori Hatlen / Rachael Kiker2-6, 6-1, 1-0
2023-05-07vs L.KempfSplit 11
W#1 DoublesDara Haney / Erin McAllister vs Jeme Avent / Meryl Golder6-1, 3-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesAmy Wolfe / Zana Piric vs Allison Graves / Gwynn Thayer3-6, 2-6
2023-04-17vs S.RhoadesSplit 11
L#1 DoublesDara Haney / Erin McAllister vs Sandra Rhoades / Tori Sutler4-6, 6-4, 0-1
W#1 SinglesZana Piric vs Christine Hughes6-3, 6-3
2023-04-16vs A.KoltchagovaLost 01
L#2 DoublesSusan Paeplow / Zana Piric vs Jennifer Ravenscraft / Lisa Buyaki1-6, 1-6
2023-03-26vs D.John 18 4.0Lost 01
L#2 DoublesZana Piric / Dara Haney vs Ashley McRae / Monique Jiggetts4-6, 6-2, 0-1
2023-03-19vs M.ThenLost 01
L#2 DoublesSusan Paeplow / Zana Piric vs Michelle Then / Heidi Ross0-6, 4-6
2023-03-12vs C.HigginsLost 01
L#2 DoublesAlicia Arana / Zana Piric vs Claire Songkakul / Chunhui Higgins1-6, 4-6
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 standings for 4.0 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 3.32 estimated across 11 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.

3.76
Erin McAllister
published
3.58
Susan Paeplow
published
3.49
Dara Haney
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.42
Janelle Howard
published
3.36
Sheila Riley
published
3.33
Zana Piric
usually #2 Doubles 83%, also #1 Singles 17% · published 3.5
3.31
Amy Wolfe
published 3.5
3.31
Melissa House
published
3.11
Lola Jefferies
published
3.08
Camille Gibbs
published 3.5
2.77
Molly Walker
published
Laura Rendon
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.

Dara Haney + Zana Piric224 matchesnot enough data
Sheila Riley + Erin McAllister123 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.

Erin McAllister
26W–20L career · no lines in 2023
3%92%4%
3.76
Susan Paeplow
4W–9L career · no lines in 2023
28%72%<1%
3.58
3.5
Dara Haney
188W–138L career · 4 lines in 2023
<1%52%48%
3.49
Janelle Howard
2W–6L career · no lines in 2023
<1%72%28%
3.42
Sheila Riley
8W–9L career · no lines in 2023
85%15%<1%
3.36
3.5
Zana Piric
135W–175L career · 6 lines in 2023
1%88%11%
3.33
3.5
Amy Wolfe
5W–14L career · no lines in 2023
1%90%9%
3.31
Melissa House
20W–19L career · no lines in 2023
1%90%9%
3.31
Lola Jefferies
3W–5L career · no lines in 2023
21%79%<1%
3.11
3.5
Camille Gibbs
2W–4L career · no lines in 2023
29%71%<1%
3.08
Molly Walker
0W–3L career · no lines in 2023
>99%<1%0%
2.77
Laura Rendon
1W–0L 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.