Teams

Runser/FS/CM

2024 Fall Into Winter Doubles · 2.5 Women

7 players · average NTRP 2.75 / ARKANSAS

View scouting list →
Schedule3 played
2025-01-16vs Rebstock/FS/CMWon 21
W#1 DoublesMadison Geels / Hunter Martin vs Jennifer Hurst / Stephanie Thornton6-1, 6-0
W#2 DoublesBrooke Runser / Andrea Sims vs Marcela Escobar / Katie Gibbs7-6, 7-5
L#3 DoublesCamille Friday / Suzanne Yerton vs Sydney Rebstock / Alejandra Padilla Alanis0-6, 0-6
2024-11-21vs Rebstock/FS/CMWon 21
L#1 DoublesCamille Friday / Suzanne Yerton vs Sally Bracken / Stephanie Thornton4-6, 3-6
W#2 DoublesBrooke Runser / Angel Geels vs Kathryn Rogers / Sydney Rebstock6-4, 6-3
W#3 DoublesHunter Martin / Andrea Sims vs Liz Jumper / Marcela Escobar6-1, 1-6, 1-0
2024-11-11vs Rebstock/FS/CMLost 12
L#1 DoublesHunter Martin / Haley Helmert vs Jennifer Hurst / Katie Gibbs1-6, 5-7
W#2 DoublesBrooke Runser / Madison Geels vs Liz Jumper / Sydney Rebstock6-4, 6-1
L#3 DoublesAngel Geels / Suzanne Yerton vs Sally Bracken / Marcela Escobar3-6, 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 2.5 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 2.34 estimated across 3 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.

Andrea Sims
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.56
Brooke Runser
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.50
Madison Geels
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
Angel Geels
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 2.5
1.95
Camille Friday
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 2.5
Haley Helmert
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Suzanne Yerton
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 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.

Madison Geels + Brooke Runser3252% games+6.0% 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.

3
Andrea Sims
2W–0L career · 2 lines in 2024
not enough data
3
Brooke Runser
6W–13L career · 3 lines in 2024
33%67%<1%
2.56
Madison Geels
6W–3L career · 2 lines in 2024
51%49%<1%
2.50
2.5
Angel Geels
1W–1L career · 2 lines in 2024
not enough data
2.5
Camille Friday
0W–5L career · 2 lines in 2024
0%>99%<1%
1.95
Haley Helmert
0W–1L career · 1 line in 2024
not enough data
Suzanne Yerton
0W–3L career · 3 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.