Teams

TAG BLUE

2023 CTA WOMEN'S DAYTIME DOUBLES - NOCO · WOMEN 3.0 - DAYTIME - NOCO

7 players · average NTRP 3.00 / 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 →
Schedule6 played
2023-06-14vs HMTC GREENLost 01
L#1 DoublesKelsi Wagner / Wendy Czapenski vs Susan Seiler / Vivian Watson6-7, 2-6
2023-06-07vs FCCC PINKLost 02
L#1 DoublesShirley Moore / Beth Smits vs Michelle Kennedy / Whitney Irvin6-2, 4-6, 0-1
L#2 DoublesThora Pabst / Pat Sprock vs Nicole Holmes / Angie Decklever3-6, 4-6
2023-05-31vs MLF ORANGELost 02
L#1 DoublesBeth Smits / Kelsi Wagner vs Diane Erickson / Maka Hammock5-7, 2-6
L#2 DoublesShirley Moore / Thora Pabst vs Lisa Martin / Geneva Ritsch6-2, 5-7, 0-1
2023-05-24vs HMTC GREENSplit 11
W#1 DoublesKimberly Wagner / Beth Smits vs Jennifer Grim / Susan Seiler6-3, 7-5
L#3 DoublesDonna Taub / Kelsi Wagner vs Vivian Watson / Alli Lackey4-6, 2-6
2023-05-17vs FCCC PINKLost 02
L#1 DoublesKimberly Wagner / Kelsi Wagner vs Whitney Irvin / Angie Decklever2-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesBeth Smits / Jamie Carlson vs Kathleen Tremblay / Shanti Green1-6, 3-6
2023-05-10vs MLF ORANGESplit 11
W#2 DoublesKelsi Wagner / Kimberly Wagner vs Lisa Martin / Ashley Sloan6-4, 7-5
L#3 DoublesThora Pabst / Pat Sprock vs Susan Prentice / Cindy Short4-6, 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 WOMEN 3.0 - 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 2.70 estimated across 4 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.

2.86
Kelsi Wagner
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published 3
2.82
Shirley Moore
published
2.66
Beth Smits
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3
2.46
Thora Pabst
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3
Donna Taub
published
Kimberly Wagner
published
Mary Hulse
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.

Thora Pabst + Beth Smits123 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
Kelsi Wagner
32W–30L career · 5 lines in 2023
<1%83%16%
2.86
Shirley Moore
34W–27L career · no lines in 2023
1%89%10%
2.82
3
Beth Smits
32W–28L career · 4 lines in 2023
13%87%1%
2.66
3
Thora Pabst
30W–85L career · type A · 3 lines in 2023
60%40%<1%
2.46
Donna Taub
3W–5L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Kimberly Wagner
0W–4L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Mary Hulse
11W–2L 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.