Teams

LCTA39/Hildreth-Marlowe/SneeFarm

LCTA 39 & Over Fall League · 39 & over Fall - Women - 3.0 Sunday

15 players · average NTRP 2.50 / 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 standings10 teams · 39 & over Fall - Women - 3.0 Sunday
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Net Results000000
2LCTA39/Donohue/MPR000000
3Krewson/Petzold000000
4Sunday Funday000000
5LCTA39/Ballard/000000
6LCTA39/Hildreth-Marlowe/SneeFarm000000
7Wright/Hamlin000000
8LCTA39-PW-WojicK-NEE000000
9LCTA39/Villarose/Pine Forest000000
10LCTA39/Eiland-Browning/Creekside000000

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 2.81 estimated across 14 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.

3.07
Katie Hakimi
published
3.00
Katie Stover
published
2.99
2.94
Maggie Marlow
published
2.89
Jennifer Hale
published
2.86
Sarah Tamsberg
published
2.85
Holly Herlong
published
2.79
Jennifer Mathis
published
2.79
Heidi Hildreth
published
2.77
Tarah Crabb
published
2.75
Kristine Ritenour
published
2.60
McRae Hogan
published
2.56
Liz Schreiner
published
2.47
Sarah Page Atkins
published
Catherine Griffin
published 2.5
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.

Tarah Crabb + Liz Schreiner15171% games+16.2% vs expected
Kristine Ritenour + Holly Herlong4257% games+11.2% vs expected
Heidi Hildreth + Tarah Crabb2349% games+0.4% vs expected
Jennifer Mathis + Sarah Tamsberg3356% games−1.1% vs expected
Sarah Tamsberg + Holly Herlong6068% gamesnot enough data
Maggie Marlow + Jennifer Klimaszewski5071% gamesnot enough data
Jennifer Mathis + Jennifer Klimaszewski314 matchesnot enough data
Catherine Griffin + Holly Herlong224 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.

Katie Hakimi
45W–18L career · no lines in 2026
<1%30%70%
3.07
Katie Stover
29W–12L career · no lines in 2026
<1%50%50%
3.00
Jennifer Klimaszewski
46W–18L career · no lines in 2026
<1%53%47%
2.99
Maggie Marlow
31W–15L career · no lines in 2026
<1%68%32%
2.94
Jennifer Hale
45W–21L career · no lines in 2026
<1%77%22%
2.89
Sarah Tamsberg
29W–16L career · no lines in 2026
<1%83%16%
2.86
Holly Herlong
62W–27L career · no lines in 2026
1%85%15%
2.85
Jennifer Mathis
46W–23L career · no lines in 2026
2%91%7%
2.79
Heidi Hildreth
71W–47L career · no lines in 2026
2%91%7%
2.79
Tarah Crabb
55W–27L career · no lines in 2026
3%92%5%
2.77
Kristine Ritenour
52W–28L career · no lines in 2026
4%93%3%
2.75
McRae Hogan
41W–9L career · no lines in 2026
23%76%<1%
2.60
Liz Schreiner
48W–22L career · no lines in 2026
33%67%<1%
2.56
Sarah Page Atkins
19W–39L career · no lines in 2026
59%41%<1%
2.47
2.5
Catherine Griffin
15W–22L career · no lines in 2026
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.