Teams

LCTA18/Foley/Creekside

STA 18 & Over Combo Doubles · 18 & Over Combo Women 6.5

21 players · average NTRP 3.40 / SOUTH CAROLINA

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 →

Flight standings for 18 & Over Combo Women 6.5 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 3.11 estimated across 19 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.

3.86
Kristin Berry
published
3.40
Jennifer Keith
published
3.27
Gabrielle Lee
published
3.27
Mallory Woodlee
published
3.26
Beth Hasty
published 3.5
Cecilia McMillan
published 3.5
3.24
Meghan Rowland
published
3.23
Marissa Regan
published
3.23
Kimberly Ring
published
3.22
Mary Pat Calvert
published
3.15
Cacky Rivers
published 3.5
3.15
Kathleen Stein
published
3.13
Cory Beckham
published 3.5
2.97
Lauren Claypoole
published
2.92
Jerri Foley
published
2.85
Leigh Dangerfield
published
2.83
Meg Rowley
published
2.73
Gretchen Naylor
published
2.72
Martha Stoney
published
2.69
Charlotte Stein
published 3
Stacey Powell
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.

Meg Rowley + Charlotte Stein2356% games+11.1% vs expected
Meg Rowley + Martha Stoney4255% games+1.8% vs expected
Meg Rowley + Cacky Rivers6449% games−0.7% vs expected
Gretchen Naylor + Charlotte Stein8750% games−0.9% vs expected
Cacky Rivers + Mallory Woodlee5256% games−2.5% vs expected
Gretchen Naylor + Leigh Dangerfield21139% games−5.9% vs expected
Kimberly Ring + Kristin Berry5069% gamesnot enough data
Jerri Foley + Martha Stoney1443% gamesnot 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.

Kristin Berry
71W–19L career · no lines in 2024
1%84%16%
3.86
Jennifer Keith
101W–56L career · no lines in 2024
<1%76%23%
3.40
Gabrielle Lee
42W–21L career · no lines in 2024
3%92%5%
3.27
Mallory Woodlee
23W–17L career · no lines in 2024
3%92%5%
3.27
3.5
Beth Hasty
30W–24L career · no lines in 2024
3%93%4%
3.26
3.5
Cecilia McMillan
11W–23L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Meghan Rowland
17W–32L career · no lines in 2024
4%93%3%
3.24
Marissa Regan
33W–40L career · no lines in 2024
5%92%3%
3.23
Kimberly Ring
56W–34L career · no lines in 2024
5%92%3%
3.23
Mary Pat Calvert
18W–12L career · no lines in 2024
6%92%2%
3.22
3.5
Cacky Rivers
36W–23L career · no lines in 2024
15%85%1%
3.15
Kathleen Stein
45W–21L career · no lines in 2024
15%84%1%
3.15
3.5
Cory Beckham
50W–17L career · no lines in 2024
17%83%<1%
3.13
Lauren Claypoole
68W–59L career · no lines in 2024
<1%59%41%
2.97
Jerri Foley
29W–25L career · no lines in 2024
70%30%<1%
2.92
Leigh Dangerfield
49W–44L career · no lines in 2024
1%85%15%
2.85
Meg Rowley
38W–33L career · no lines in 2024
1%88%11%
2.83
Gretchen Naylor
28W–44L career · no lines in 2024
5%92%3%
2.73
Martha Stoney
32W–39L career · no lines in 2024
6%92%2%
2.72
3
Charlotte Stein
35W–43L career · no lines in 2024
9%90%1%
2.69
Stacey Powell
50W–35L career · no lines in 2024
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.