Teams

Handley/Fikes

2023 Adult 18 & Over Spring · Women 3.5

18 players · average NTRP 3.62 / ST. LOUIS

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2023-05-21vs Borghi/SteinhartLost 01
L#3 DoublesLeslie Foss / Jamie Cregger vs Ann Eveker / Lauri McNabb2-6, 4-6
2023-04-29vs Lyons/RhoadsWon 10
W#3 DoublesLeslie Foss / Jamie Cregger vs Lynn Barklage / Judy Newlin6-3, 2-6, 1-0
2023-03-12vs Ross/RehnquistWon 10
W#3 DoublesJamie Cregger / Julie Nichols vs MaryLou Pudlowski / Ruth Ehresman6-2, 6-3
2023-03-05vs HoxseyWon 10
W#3 DoublesNancy Kraemer / Jamie Cregger vs Nicole Langone / Kalie Snyder4-6, 6-3, 1-0
2023-01-29vs SchwaegelWon 10
W#3 DoublesJamie Cregger / Mary Alice Grady vs Sara Schildknecht / Sharon Hilyard6-3, 4-6, 1-0
2023-01-15vs DossettLost 01
L#3 DoublesLeslie Foss / Jamie Cregger vs Alexandra Franke / Christine McDougell0-6, 1-6
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 standings17 teams · Women 3.5
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1STL/Fridley/18&Over3.5W171682259622
2Brewer/Thomas (S)153622867679
3Brennan (S)153632770680
4Handley/Fikes135553585741
5Durbala/Austin (S)126612968656
6Ross/Rehnquist1174347108809
7Coomes/Bleyer (S)108523894795
8AuBuchon/Blades99464499805
9Short/Boyd8104149104796
10Lyons/Rhoads8103852118842
11Team Dawesome7114050115847
12McIntire/McNealy7113852116881
13Mehner/Hammond7113753117856
14Burke/Causey7113951117836
15Steinhart/Borghi5133456121850
16Criner/Albrecht5133060129887
17Schwaegel2162367138955

Ordered by team wins, then losses, then sets lost — the order USTA uses to seed a flight. Individual wins are lines, not ties.

See the full flight, with every team’s record

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 3.38 estimated across 16 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.

3.77
Katie Spencer
usually #1 Doubles 73%, also #2 Doubles 18% · published
3.69
Kayla Nieman
usually #1 Doubles 56%, also #1 Singles 25% · published
3.64
Erica Yalavarthi
usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #1 Singles 36% · published 4
3.61
Nancy Kraemer
usually #1 Doubles 36%, also #2 Doubles 32% · published
3.58
Maggie Desai
usually #2 Doubles 40%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
3.56
Missy McCormick
usually #1 Doubles 52%, also #1 Singles 26% · published
3.44
Shannon Bryan
usually #1 Doubles 44%, also #2 Doubles 22% · published
3.38
Laura Boeker
usually #1 Doubles 29%, also #2 Singles 29% · published
3.37
Heather Bartling
usually #1 Doubles 31%, also #2 Doubles 23% · published 3.5
3.29
Lauren Meyer
usually #2 Doubles 47%, also #3 Doubles 26% · published
3.19
Tara Freese Clifford
usually #2 Doubles 64%, also #1 Doubles 14% · published
3.17
Mary Alice Grady
usually #3 Doubles 54%, also #2 Doubles 39% · published
3.14
Jamie Cregger
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.09
Mary Handley
usually #2 Doubles 46%, also #3 Doubles 27% · published
3.08
Leslie Foss
usually #3 Doubles 64%, also #2 Singles 29% · published
3.06
Amy Fikes
usually #3 Doubles 71%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published 3.5
Julie Nichols
published
Meg Handley
usually #2 Singles 67%, also #1 Singles 33% · 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.

Heather Bartling + Katie Spencer6074% games+19.3% vs expected
Kayla Nieman + Laura Boeker9171% games+18.6% vs expected
Lauren Meyer + Kayla Nieman6164% games+17.0% vs expected
Maggie Desai + Katie Spencer7167% games+16.5% vs expected
Maggie Desai + Nancy Kraemer11169% games+15.8% vs expected
Maggie Desai + Mary Alice Grady5264% games+14.5% vs expected
Nancy Kraemer + Mary Alice Grady5172% games+14.1% vs expected
Kayla Nieman + Nancy Kraemer5162% games+13.7% vs expected
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.

Katie Spencer
58W–9L career · 11 lines in 2023
2%94%4%
3.77
Kayla Nieman
145W–35L career · 16 lines in 2023
7%92%1%
3.69
4
Erica Yalavarthi
165W–82L career · 25 lines in 2023
14%86%<1%
3.64
Nancy Kraemer
144W–74L career · 21 lines in 2023
19%80%<1%
3.61
Maggie Desai
115W–42L career · 15 lines in 2023
<1%26%74%
3.58
Missy McCormick
87W–89L career · 26 lines in 2023
34%66%<1%
3.56
Shannon Bryan
173W–81L career · 26 lines in 2023
69%31%<1%
3.44
Laura Boeker
109W–63L career · 13 lines in 2023
<1%82%18%
3.38
3.5
Heather Bartling
94W–54L career · 12 lines in 2023
<1%84%16%
3.37
Lauren Meyer
119W–68L career · 19 lines in 2023
1%94%5%
3.29
Tara Freese Clifford
111W–55L career · 14 lines in 2023
7%92%1%
3.19
Mary Alice Grady
83W–63L career · 13 lines in 2023
9%90%1%
3.17
3.5
Jamie Cregger
32W–32L career · 6 lines in 2023
14%86%<1%
3.14
Mary Handley
88W–79L career · 11 lines in 2023
25%75%<1%
3.09
Leslie Foss
41W–52L career · 14 lines in 2023
26%74%<1%
3.08
3.5
Amy Fikes
88W–62L career · 7 lines in 2023
33%67%<1%
3.06
Julie Nichols
13W–7L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Meg Handley
6W–4L career · 6 lines in 2023
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.