Teams

MLF

2021 CTA WOMEN'S DAYTIME DOUBLES - NOCO · WOMEN 3.5 - DAYTIME - NOCO

9 players · average NTRP 3.33 / COLORADO

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 →
Schedule5 played
2021-06-22vs HMTCWon 10
W#2 DoublesMarsha Conley / Camille Benton vs Judy Stout / Teresa Adsit6-3, 6-1
2021-06-19vs TAGLost 01
L#2 DoublesKathy Petersen / Camille Benton vs Janet Crespin / Larea Warden1-6, 4-6
2021-06-08vs FCCCWon 10
W#2 DoublesCarol Hiller / Marsha Conley vs Karen Preiss / Kaylyn Shelby6-4, 6-2
2021-05-18vs HMTCWon 10
W#2 DoublesCarol Hiller / Camille Benton vs Judy Stout / Wendy Ball5-7, 6-3, 1-0
2021-05-11vs TAGWon 10
W#3 DoublesCarol Hiller / Camille Benton vs Erin Dirvonas / Andrea Flake6-2, 4-6, 1-0
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 WOMEN 3.5 - DAYTIME - NOCO 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 3.09 estimated across 3 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.

3.29
Debora J Miller
published 3.5
3.23
Camille Benton
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
2.75
Carol Hiller
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3
Gail Milliken
published
Jean Darst
published
Kathy Petersen
published
Lorna Coggon
published
Marsha Conley
published
Mary Wedum
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.

Kathy Petersen + Lorna Coggon7163% games+6.0% vs expected
Kathy Petersen + Debora J Miller213 matchesnot enough data
Gail Milliken + Carol Hiller213 matchesnot enough data
Carol Hiller + Debora J Miller303 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.

3.5
Debora J Miller
27W–16L career · no lines in 2021
1%93%5%
3.29
3.5
Camille Benton
106W–46L career · 4 lines in 2021
4%94%2%
3.23
3
Carol Hiller
74W–70L career · 3 lines in 2021
3%95%3%
2.75
Gail Milliken
4W–4L career · no lines in 2021
not enough data
Jean Darst
1W–0L career · no lines in 2021
not enough data
Kathy Petersen
18W–5L career · no lines in 2021
not enough data
Lorna Coggon
7W–4L career · no lines in 2021
not enough data
Marsha Conley
14W–8L career · no lines in 2021
not enough data
Mary Wedum
12W–15L career · no lines in 2021
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.