Teams

MC TEAL

2024 CTA WOMEN'S SUMMER DAYTIME - DEN · WOMEN 4.5 - SUMMER DAYTIME

8 players · average NTRP 4.33 / COLORADO

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 →
Schedule6 played
2024-08-15vs LTA-Q GREENSplit 11
L#1 DoublesSusan Hoelscher / Jenna Marvin vs Erin Gray / Tina Gray5-7, 2-6
W#1 SinglesCyndy Besselievre vs Sara Chan3-6, 6-2, 1-0
2024-08-08Lost 01
L#1 SinglesCyndy Besselievre vs Emily Loewenthal2-6, 2-6
2024-07-18vs LTFC NAVYWon 10
W#1 DoublesDenise Belk / Jenna Marvin vs Tracy Brunschwig / Kim Ripka7-5, 6-1
2024-07-15vs SS-LGT ORANGELost 12
W#1 DoublesDenise Belk / Susan Hoelscher vs Jordan Campbell / KC Nettleton6-3, 6-1
L#1 SinglesCyndy Besselievre vs Michelle Degitis4-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesKaren Greenwood / Jenna Marvin vs Laura Montoya / Julie Clapham6-7, 4-6
2024-07-11vs CK GREENSplit 11
W#1 DoublesDenise Belk / Karen Greenwood vs Katherine Richey / Melissa Doyle3-6, 7-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesSusan Beaudoin / Cyndy Besselievre vs Margaret Lamb / Shannon Kiebler2-6, 3-6
2024-06-27vs LTFC ORANGESplit 11
W#1 DoublesSusan Hoelscher / Denise Belk vs Lori Benson / Kelly Hardy7-5, 6-4
L#1 SinglesCyndy Besselievre vs Lauren Tripp6-7, 3-6
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 standings for WOMEN 4.5 - SUMMER DAYTIME 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 4.03 estimated across 8 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.

4.29
Susan Hoelscher
published
4.22
Denise Belk
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
4.14
Jenna Marvin
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4.5
4.00
Cyndy Besselievre
usually #1 Singles 80%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published 4
3.99
Susan Beaudoin
published
3.95
Kim Grogan
published
3.92
Karen Greenwood
published
3.75
Lora Quirk
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.

Lora Quirk + Karen Greenwood11158% games+5.1% vs expected
Lora Quirk + Cyndy Besselievre4260% games+3.9% vs expected
Karen Greenwood + Cyndy Besselievre3353% games−15.1% vs expected
Karen Greenwood + Susan Beaudoin213 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.

Susan Hoelscher
24W–14L career · no lines in 2024
2%92%6%
4.29
4.5
Denise Belk
130W–87L career · 4 lines in 2024
6%92%2%
4.22
4.5
Jenna Marvin
54W–43L career · 3 lines in 2024
16%83%<1%
4.14
4
Cyndy Besselievre
72W–76L career · 5 lines in 2024
<1%51%49%
4.00
Susan Beaudoin
24W–5L career · no lines in 2024
<1%52%48%
3.99
Kim Grogan
3W–17L career · no lines in 2024
63%37%<1%
3.95
Karen Greenwood
49W–19L career · no lines in 2024
<1%71%29%
3.92
Lora Quirk
25W–16L career · no lines in 2024
4%93%4%
3.75

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.