Teams

Hufft/18s/3.0/TCH Day

2025 Man · Cov Adult 18 & Over - Women Day

11 players · average NTRP 3.00 / LOUISIANA

View scouting list →
Schedule2 played
2025-04-29Lost 01
L#3 DoublesRhoda Blaum / Jenna Shamieh vs Japonica Cruise / Toni Shepherd3-6, 4-6
2025-02-04Won 10
W#1 DoublesMary Barnett / Rhoda Blaum vs Michelle Ricotta / Erin Roy6-3, 6-1
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 standings3 teams · Cov Adult 18 & Over - Women Day
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Dodson/18s/3.0/BC Day8033716234
2Hufft/18s/3.0/TCH Day35211942344
3Harrison/18s/3.0/SC Day1763471457

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 2.67 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.

2.85
Elizabeth Alario
usually #3 Doubles 47%, also #2 Doubles 24% · published 3
2.65
Chanell Charapata
usually #1 Doubles 36%, also #2 Doubles 24% · published 3
2.63
Danielle Hufft
usually #3 Doubles 42%, also #2 Doubles 35% · published 3
2.63
Celia Guillory
usually #3 Doubles 44%, also #1 Doubles 31% · published 3
2.58
Emily Drake
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 30% · published 3
Jenna Shamieh
usually #3 Doubles 40%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Kristen Muller Clinton
usually #2 Doubles 44%, also #3 Doubles 22% · published
Lauren Renwick
usually #3 Doubles 72%, also #2 Doubles 28% · published
Nicole Allison
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
Rhoda Blaum
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
Stephanie Nash
usually #3 Doubles 32%, also #1 Doubles 32% · 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.

Celia Guillory + Stephanie Nash5449% gamesnot enough data
Nicole Allison + Danielle Hufft4163% gamesnot enough data
Elizabeth Alario + Jenna Shamieh2349% gamesnot enough data
Nicole Allison + Lauren Renwick303 matchesnot enough data
Lauren Renwick + Jenna Shamieh213 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.

3
Elizabeth Alario
11W–15L career · 17 lines in 2025
<1%86%13%
2.85
3
Chanell Charapata
13W–31L career · 22 lines in 2025
13%87%<1%
2.65
3
Danielle Hufft
19W–28L career · 25 lines in 2025
15%84%<1%
2.63
3
Celia Guillory
10W–13L career · 16 lines in 2025
16%84%<1%
2.63
3
Emily Drake
7W–11L career · 10 lines in 2025
28%72%<1%
2.58
Jenna Shamieh
18W–16L career · 14 lines in 2025
not enough data
Kristen Muller Clinton
4W–10L career · 9 lines in 2025
not enough data
Lauren Renwick
12W–7L career · 18 lines in 2025
not enough data
Nicole Allison
31W–8L career · 20 lines in 2025
not enough data
Rhoda Blaum
7W–10L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Stephanie Nash
29W–16L career · 24 lines in 2025
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.