2BRC-SCOTT 35NW WE 18&O SEM F1
2025 bSEM ADULT 18 & OVER NIGHT WOMEN · 3.5 WOMEN WED PM SEM
20 players · average NTRP 3.40 / S.E. MICHIGAN
No matches recorded for this roster in this league — it may be a placeholder registration, or the season may not have started.
Schedule8 played
i
Flight standings24 teams · 3.5 WOMEN WED PM SEM
| Team | W | L | Sets lost | Games lost |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 14EAST-MULIER 35NW WE 18&O SEM F3 | 9 | 0 | 21 | 238 |
| 25OHCC-WEISHAAR 35NW WE 18&O SEM F1 | 8 | 0 | 14 | 247 |
| 36WESS-LI 35NW WE 18&O SEM F5 | 8 | 0 | 20 | 243 |
| 43HV-SOBER 35NW WE 18&O SEM F4 | 8 | 2 | 35 | 374 |
| 54LIB-MARLEY 35NW WE 18&O SEM F4 | 8 | 2 | 36 | 354 |
| 63BT-NOVOTNY 35NW WE 18&O SEM F2 | 7 | 2 | 40 | 354 |
| 76VTC-outside-SELLA 35NW WE 18&O SEM F4 | 7 | 3 | 44 | 390 |
| 81SCWB-CHEN 35NW WE 18&O SEM F5 | 5 | 3 | 37 | 334 |
| 93PEACH-MAZUR 35NW WE 18&O SEM F3 | 5 | 4 | 45 | 398 |
| 104TROY-YOUNG 35NW WE 18&O SEM F2 | 5 | 4 | 57 | 459 |
| 112BART-MOLLOY 35NW WE 18&O SEM F4 | 5 | 5 | 63 | 482 |
| 123NAC-POPLOSKIE 35NW WE 18&O SEM F5 | 4 | 4 | 40 | 337 |
| 132BRC-SCOTT 35NW WE 18&O SEM F1 | 4 | 4 | 50 | 380 |
| 143BCC-LEHMAN 35NW WE 18&O SEM F1 | 4 | 4 | 50 | 358 |
| 151TROY-WERNETTE 35NW WE 18&O SEM F1 | 3 | 5 | 51 | 383 |
| 161LIFE-MARVEL NELSON 35NW WE 18&O SEM F2 | 3 | 6 | 52 | 413 |
| 172BRC-KISH 35NW WE 18&O SEM F2 | 3 | 6 | 57 | 420 |
| 185DEER-MOWBRAY 35NW WE 18&O SEM F5 | 2 | 6 | 62 | 429 |
| 192EAST-ZAMPARDO 35NW WE 18&O SEM F3 | 2 | 7 | 68 | 487 |
| 201BRC-SOMERS 35NW WE 18&O SEM F3 | 2 | 7 | 70 | 472 |
| 215CHIP-SHAW 35NW WE 18&O SEM F4 | 2 | 8 | 70 | 511 |
| 224DCD-MOORE 35NW WE 18&O SEM F1 | 1 | 7 | 57 | 407 |
| 234NAC-NAY 35NW WE 18&O SEM F5 | 1 | 7 | 65 | 443 |
| 241MONY-KELLY 35NW WE 18&O SEM F4 | 0 | 10 | 81 | 553 |
Ordered by team wins, then losses, then sets lost — the order USTA uses to seed a flight. Individual wins are lines, not ties.
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 3.15 estimated across 15 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.
Doubles pairs from this roster with three or more matches together anywhere — ordered by performance against what the rating gap predicted, not by record.
| Tracy Lamerato + Barbara Lindeblad | 29–12 | 57% games | +4.3% vs expected |
| Kelly Coe + Jennifer Berk-King | 44–21 | 57% games | +3.7% vs expected |
| Catherine Topf + Katherine Noser | 5–3 | 56% games | +1.9% vs expected |
| Kelly Coe + Sara Van Wormer | 4–3 | 52% games | −0.7% vs expected |
| Julie Farnsworth + Catherine Topf | 5–3 | 45% games | −1.1% vs expected |
| Jennifer Berk-King + Sara Van Wormer | 3–2 | 56% games | −2.5% vs expected |
| Julie Farnsworth + Christine Scott | 7–12 | 41% games | −4.1% vs expected |
| Kitte Currier + Laura Burke | 5–9 | 48% games | −4.2% vs expected |
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.
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.