Teams

4 Ridgetop Pugh Singles

2025 Richmond Singles · Richmond Singles 2.5 Women

6 players · average NTRP 3.00 / VIRGINIA

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2025-11-03vs 16 Avalon HallettWon 20
W#1 SinglesGrayson Honeycutt vs Jana Braswell6-0, 6-0
W#2 SinglesNicole Pugh vs Madelaine Jones6-1, 6-0
2025-10-27vs 14 Chestnut Oaks WistSplit 11
W#1 SinglesKerrissa MacPherson vs Ngan Dinh7-6, 6-3
L#2 SinglesLauren Timms vs Valerie Katulka2-6, 1-6
2025-10-20vs 7 SCC Happy Hitters - PercyLost 12
W#1 SinglesGrayson Honeycutt vs Michelle Foley6-1, 4-6, 1-0
L#2 SinglesLauren Timms vs Kristen Hensel2-6, 1-6
L#3 SinglesNicole Pugh vs Abby Getzel3-6, 6-1, 0-1
2025-10-13vs 1 HCC GarnerLost 03
L#1 SinglesGrayson Honeycutt vs Kathryn Horsley5-7, 2-6
L#2 SinglesMadison Woods vs Meghan Hale3-6, 2-6
L#3 SinglesNicole Pugh vs Savon Sampson1-6, 1-6
2025-10-06vs 8 Woodlake - Schiavone CorraziniLost 12
W#1 SinglesMadison Woods vs Kim Corazzini7-6, 3-6, 1-0
L#2 SinglesKatherine OHara vs Elizabeth Snow1-6, 5-7
L#3 SinglesKerrissa MacPherson vs Stefanie Sempek2-6, 6-3, 0-1
2025-10-01vs 6 KRAKrushers - GaritzWon 21
W#1 SinglesMadison Woods vs Lauren Dunn2-6, 6-3, 1-0
L#2 SinglesLauren Timms vs Luiza Bretas4-6, 1-6
W#3 SinglesKerrissa MacPherson vs Nicole Bridge6-0, 6-1
2025-09-24vs 5 Westwood GeeWon 21
W#1 SinglesGrayson Honeycutt vs Beth Wong6-4, 6-3
W#2 SinglesKatherine OHara vs Kelly Noack6-4, 6-0
L#3 SinglesKerrissa MacPherson vs Nina Diersen6-7, 3-6
2025-09-15vs 3 Chestnut Oaks - Coyle 2.5Won 30
W#1 SinglesGrayson Honeycutt vs Jenna Coyle6-2, 6-2
W#2 SinglesMadison Woods vs Jamie Borel6-2, 6-1
W#3 SinglesLauren Timms vs Tracey Morris6-3, 6-3
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 Richmond Singles 2.5 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 2.17 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.

Grayson Honeycutt
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 3
2.23
Kerrissa MacPherson
usually #3 Singles 75%, also #1 Singles 25% · published
2.16
Nicole Pugh
usually #3 Singles 67%, also #2 Singles 33% · published
2.11
Katherine OHara
usually #2 Singles 100% · published
Lauren Timms
usually #2 Singles 75%, also #3 Singles 25% · published
Madison Woods
usually #2 Singles 50%, also #1 Singles 50% · published
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
Grayson Honeycutt
5W–4L career · 5 lines in 2025
not enough data
Kerrissa MacPherson
6W–11L career · 4 lines in 2025
0%98%2%
2.23
Nicole Pugh
3W–15L career · 3 lines in 2025
0%>99%<1%
2.16
Katherine OHara
5W–10L career · 2 lines in 2025
0%>99%<1%
2.11
Lauren Timms
1W–3L career · 4 lines in 2025
not enough data
Madison Woods
3W–3L career · 4 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.