Teams

Bon Air Rhodes

2023 Richmond Flexible Format Women · Richmond Flexible Format Women 7.0

10 players · average NTRP / VIRGINIA

View scouting list →
Schedule7 played
2023-05-22vs MAC MortonWon 10
W#2 Female DoublesLynette Villadelgado / Rebecca Madison vs Mary Church / Susan Staton5-7, 6-2, 1-0
2023-05-15vs Westwood SeredniLost 02
L#1 Female DoublesRebecca Madison / Lynette Villadelgado vs Margaret Burke / Kacie Painter4-6, 5-7
L#2 Female DoublesMichelle Jepson / Martha Rhodes vs Christine Albrecht / Caren Payne2-6, 3-6
2023-05-08vs RMC SweeneyLost 02
L#1 Female DoublesNancy Metz / Michelle Jepson vs Cynthia Muncy / Lynne Moore2-6, 5-7
L#2 Female DoublesLynette Villadelgado / Martha Rhodes vs Kimberly Garrett / Catherine Sweeney6-4, 3-6, 0-1
2023-05-01vs Raintree EntersWon 10
W#1 Female DoublesMichelle Jepson / Rebecca Madison vs Suzanne Spadafora / Katheryn Enters7-6, 6-2
2023-04-24Lost 01
L#1 Female DoublesJeanne Albright / Lynette Villadelgado vs Beth Bell / Christine Lemons2-6, 5-7
2023-04-17Lost 01
L#1 Female DoublesLynette Villadelgado / Janet Miller vs Jennifer Morgan / Mary Williams1-6, 4-6
2023-04-10vs CCV BealeLost 01
L#2 Female DoublesMichelle Jepson / Kimberly Rabb vs Kirsten Boyd / Ashley Millen6-4, 3-6, 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 Richmond Flexible Format Women 7.0 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 2.97 estimated across 10 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
Michelle Jepson
usually #2 Female Doubles 50%, also #1 Female Doubles 50% · published
3.17
Rebecca Madison
published
3.16
Nancy Metz
published
2.99
Robin Balsamo
published
2.96
Martha Rhodes
published
2.93
Jeanne Albright
published
2.87
Lynette Villadelgado
usually #1 Female Doubles 60%, also #2 Female Doubles 40% · published
2.83
Pamela Blackburn
published
2.76
Kimberly Rabb
published
2.76
Donna Lawson
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.

Jeanne Albright + Nancy Metz2740% games−0.7% vs expected
Lynette Villadelgado + Michelle Jepson3448% gamesnot enough data
Martha Rhodes + Robin Balsamo224 matchesnot enough data
Martha Rhodes + Donna Lawson123 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.

Michelle Jepson
129W–103L career · 4 lines in 2023
2%91%7%
3.29
Rebecca Madison
1W–3L career · no lines in 2023
12%88%1%
3.17
Nancy Metz
11W–17L career · no lines in 2023
12%87%1%
3.16
Robin Balsamo
11W–18L career · no lines in 2023
<1%54%46%
2.99
Martha Rhodes
16W–22L career · no lines in 2023
<1%62%38%
2.96
Jeanne Albright
11W–20L career · no lines in 2023
<1%69%31%
2.93
Lynette Villadelgado
132W–130L career · 5 lines in 2023
<1%82%17%
2.87
Pamela Blackburn
28W–33L career · no lines in 2023
1%88%11%
2.83
Kimberly Rabb
0W–8L career · no lines in 2023
95%5%<1%
2.76
Donna Lawson
5W–13L career · no lines in 2023
3%92%4%
2.76

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.