Teams

RENO TENNIS CENTER CW8.5A

2023 COMBO · Women 8.5

15 players · average NTRP 4.29 / NO. CALIFORNIA

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 →
Schedule3 played
2023-11-04vs ZEPHYR COVE CW8.5AWon 10
W#1 DoublesAlicia Deffebach / Kathleen Stevens vs Liz Zapalac / Sonja Leonard6-0, 6-0
2023-10-15vs ZEPHYR COVE CW8.5AWon 10
W#2 DoublesLucretia Conklin / Kathleen Stevens vs Liz Zapalac / Jacqueline Vicks6-2, 6-0
2023-09-17vs ZEPHYR COVE CW8.5ALost 01
L#1 DoublesLucretia Conklin / Kathleen Stevens vs Lisa Abbott / Debra Ziegler4-6, 6-7
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 8.5 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 3.86 estimated across 13 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.

4.33
Lucretia Conklin
published
4.32
Alicia Deffebach
published 4.5
4.10
Chrystelle Musquin
published 4.5
4.09
Adrian Shochat
published 4.5
4.00
Jennifer Pereos
published
3.99
CAREY Corfield
published 4
3.89
Becky Tam
published 4
3.72
Mary Alice Pisani
published
3.72
3.62
Natalie Dejan
published
3.55
May Blom
published
3.51
Victoria Ness
published
3.37
Kathleen Stevens
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4.5
Kristine Wymore
published
Shelli Tiller
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.

Alicia Deffebach + CAREY Corfield1446% gamesnot 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.

Lucretia Conklin
6W–4L career · no lines in 2023
1%88%11%
4.33
4.5
Alicia Deffebach
17W–10L career · no lines in 2023
1%89%10%
4.32
4.5
Chrystelle Musquin
11W–14L career · no lines in 2023
25%75%<1%
4.10
4.5
Adrian Shochat
1W–3L career · no lines in 2023
26%74%<1%
4.09
Jennifer Pereos
44W–9L career · no lines in 2023
<1%49%51%
4.00
4
CAREY Corfield
7W–10L career · type A · no lines in 2023
<1%54%46%
3.99
4
Becky Tam
8W–8L career · no lines in 2023
<1%78%22%
3.89
Mary Alice Pisani
3W–8L career · no lines in 2023
6%92%2%
3.72
4
Cristin Bisbee Priest
4W–6L career · no lines in 2023
6%92%2%
3.72
Natalie Dejan
2W–1L career · no lines in 2023
19%81%<1%
3.62
May Blom
4W–10L career · no lines in 2023
36%64%<1%
3.55
Victoria Ness
14W–11L career · no lines in 2023
<1%47%53%
3.51
4.5
Kathleen Stevens
63W–41L career · 3 lines in 2023
>99%<1%<1%
3.37
Kristine Wymore
0W–4L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Shelli Tiller
1W–1L career · no 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.