Teams

SCC- Andrews

2022 Richmond Adult 18 & Over Weekday Women · Richmond Adult 18 & Over 3.5 Women

11 players · average NTRP 3.50 / VIRGINIA

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2022-06-17vs RCC GnappWon 20
W#1 DoublesMandy Tornabene / Alicia Watkins vs Lynda Weston / Betsy Siewers6-2, 7-5
W#3 DoublesJann Clarke / Caroline Andrews vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2022-06-15vs WOCC StringerWon 10
W#2 DoublesCaroline Andrews / Mandy Setliff vs Heather Drew / Laura Vetter1-6, 7-5, 1-0
2022-06-08vs TDC SpillareWon 10
W#3 DoublesCaroline Andrews / Mandy Setliff vs Leslie Baker / Melissa MacAleese6-1, 6-3
2022-06-03vs HCC Lines 3.5Won 10
W#2 DoublesCaroline Andrews / Morgan Schwartz vs Michelle Harman / Kimberly Ross7-5, 6-3
2022-06-01vs ACAC CraneWon 10
W#2 DoublesCaroline Andrews / Alicia Grogan vs Kathie Naylor / Dina Weddle6-2, 6-2
2022-05-27vs Kings Charter RamserWon 10
W#3 DoublesCaroline Andrews / Alicia Watkins vs Donna Moore / Carole Ramser6-1, 6-0
2022-05-25vs Woodlake CookseyLost 01
L#3 DoublesCaroline Andrews / Robin Sorensen vs Karen ODonnell / Kara Key4-6, 1-6
2022-05-20vs CCV Goodwin-LevyLost 01
L#1 DoublesCaroline Andrews / Alicia Watkins vs Amanda Galanti / Donna Butler3-6, 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 Richmond Adult 18 & Over 3.5 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 3.31 estimated across 11 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.

3.58
Heather Benedetti
published 3.5
3.53
Becky McNeer
published 3.5
3.40
Mandy Tornabene
published
3.40
Morgan Schwartz
published
3.38
Alicia Watkins
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.27
Laura Booberg
published
3.24
Mandy Setliff
published
3.19
Robin Sorensen
published
3.19
Dorothy Hillgrove
published 3.5
3.14
Virginia Totaro
published
3.09
Caroline Andrews
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 38% · published 3.5
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.

Caroline Andrews + Alicia Watkins151152% games+1.3% 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.

3.5
Heather Benedetti
29W–10L career · no lines in 2022
<1%27%73%
3.58
3.5
Becky McNeer
30W–20L career · no lines in 2022
<1%42%58%
3.53
Mandy Tornabene
15W–11L career · no lines in 2022
<1%77%23%
3.40
Morgan Schwartz
16W–11L career · no lines in 2022
<1%78%22%
3.40
3.5
Alicia Watkins
218W–110L career · 3 lines in 2022
<1%83%17%
3.38
Laura Booberg
6W–5L career · no lines in 2022
2%94%4%
3.27
Mandy Setliff
5W–5L career · no lines in 2022
3%94%2%
3.24
Robin Sorensen
5W–9L career · no lines in 2022
7%92%1%
3.19
3.5
Dorothy Hillgrove
4W–6L career · no lines in 2022
7%92%1%
3.19
Virginia Totaro
6W–4L career · no lines in 2022
15%85%<1%
3.14
3.5
Caroline Andrews
69W–67L career · 8 lines in 2022
25%75%<1%
3.09

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.