Teams

M13 Dominion Club Long

2024 Richmond Adult 40 & Over Weekday Women · Richmond Adult 40 & Over 3.5 Weekday Women

11 players · average NTRP 3.50 / VIRGINIA

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
2024-07-17vs G7 ACAC Hoefer NaylorLost 02
L#1 DoublesHeidi Collier / Lori Davis vs Kathie Naylor / Neki Grant3-6, 7-5, 1-0
L#2 DoublesMichele Limoges / Justine Sherman vs Katherine Guerette / Carol Hoefer6-1, 4-6, 0-1
2024-07-10vs C3 Willow Oaks StringerLost 01
L#1 DoublesSheri Carlyle / Heidi Collier vs Laura Vetter / Jenny Norfleet6-2, 1-6, 0-1
2024-06-28vs L12 Woodlake CookseyWon 20
W#1 DoublesSheri Carlyle / Heidi Collier vs Laurie Cooksey / Robin Oldt6-2, 6-4
W#2 DoublesJustine Sherman / Nancy Price vs Dianne Revelle / Laura Kelly6-1, 6-1
2024-06-26vs J10 Raintree StahlingLost 01
L#1 DoublesLori Davis / Justine Sherman vs Mandy Setliff / Pam Koch2-6, 4-6
2024-06-21vs H8 Burkwood LeeWon 10
W#1 DoublesHeidi Collier / Justine Sherman vs Melissa Allen / DAYNA SCHOOLS6-2, 6-0
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 Adult 40 & Over 3.5 Weekday 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 3.17 estimated across 11 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.

3.81
Nancy Price
published
3.49
Melissa MacAleese
published
3.36
Justine Sherman
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.35
Heidi Collier
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.16
Cynthia Mistretta
published 3.5
3.12
Sheri Carlyle
published
3.05
Michele Limoges
published
3.04
Annette Vignone
published 3.5
2.90
Kumiko Suzuki
published
2.87
Eliza Causey
published
2.71
Leslie Baker
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.

Heidi Collier + Justine Sherman201255% games+5.6% vs expected
Sheri Carlyle + Heidi Collier404 matchesnot enough data
Sheri Carlyle + Michele Limoges123 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.

Nancy Price
7W–8L career · no lines in 2024
<1%1%99%
3.81
Melissa MacAleese
14W–9L career · no lines in 2024
<1%53%47%
3.49
3.5
Justine Sherman
89W–60L career · 4 lines in 2024
<1%83%16%
3.36
3.5
Heidi Collier
118W–81L career · 4 lines in 2024
1%85%14%
3.35
3.5
Cynthia Mistretta
6W–11L career · no lines in 2024
12%87%1%
3.16
Sheri Carlyle
17W–10L career · no lines in 2024
21%79%<1%
3.12
Michele Limoges
4W–8L career · no lines in 2024
37%63%<1%
3.05
3.5
Annette Vignone
2W–6L career · no lines in 2024
39%61%<1%
3.04
Kumiko Suzuki
3W–7L career · no lines in 2024
77%23%<1%
2.90
Eliza Causey
21W–13L career · no lines in 2024
<1%82%18%
2.87
Leslie Baker
5W–10L career · no lines in 2024
6%92%2%
2.71

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.