Teams

DLape

2022 Capital Summer 18 & Over Singles League · 4.0 Women

8 players · average NTRP 3.75 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2022-08-04vs CRobayo 4.0Split 11
L#1 SinglesSara Velarde vs Suyeon Kim2-6, 3-6
W#2 SinglesLori Jensen vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2022-08-04vs AGravesLost 03
L#1 SinglesButton Hall vs Elena Pinkus3-6, 3-6
L#2 SinglesAmber Cagle vs Emily Johnson6-3, 2-6, 0-1
L#3 SinglesDeanna Lape vs Lisa Kempf2-6, 0-6
2022-07-14Lost 01
L#2 SinglesLori Jensen vs Kristin Sobey1-6, 1-6
2022-07-07vs EMcAllisterWon 20
W#1 SinglesButton Hall vs Janelle Howard6-2, 7-6
W#2 SinglesAmber Cagle vs Erin McAllister3-6, 6-4, 1-0
2022-06-30vs AGravesLost 12
L#1 SinglesAmber Cagle vs Allison Graves3-6, 1-6
L#2 SinglesDeanna Lape vs Emily Johnson0-6, 1-6
W#3 SinglesSara Velarde vs Yvette LeGrande6-4, 3-6, 1-0
2022-06-28vs CRobayo 4.0Won 10
W#2 SinglesButton Hall vs Mariana Lima Gonzalez6-4, 2-6, 1-0
2022-06-09Lost 01
L#1 SinglesAmber Cagle vs Kristin Sobey1-6, 0-6
2022-06-02vs EMcAllisterSplit 11
W#1 SinglesButton Hall vs Nikki DAmbrose6-4, 6-3
L#3 SinglesDeanna Lape vs Molly Walker2-6, 1-6
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 4.0 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 3.45 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.

3.85
Laura McNiven
published 4
3.71
Amber Cagle
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #2 Singles 50% · published 4
3.60
Button Hall
usually #1 Singles 75%, also #2 Singles 25% · published 4
3.52
Betsy Shane
published 4
3.33
Deanna Lape
usually #3 Singles 67%, also #2 Singles 33% · published 3.5
3.26
Sara Velarde
usually #3 Singles 50%, also #1 Singles 50% · published 3.5
3.24
Lori Jensen
usually #2 Singles 100% · published 3.5
3.11
Bobbie West
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.

Lori Jensen + Deanna Lape171351% games+4.3% vs expected
Sara Velarde + Lori Jensen7258% gamesnot enough data
Deanna Lape + Laura McNiven6364% gamesnot enough data
Lori Jensen + Amber Cagle3455% gamesnot enough data
Deanna Lape + Button Hall3255% gamesnot enough data
Sara Velarde + Button Hall224 matchesnot enough data
Sara Velarde + Deanna Lape123 matchesnot enough data
Lori Jensen + Button Hall213 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.

4
Laura McNiven
352W–122L career · no lines in 2022
<1%87%13%
3.85
4
Amber Cagle
216W–100L career · 4 lines in 2022
6%93%1%
3.71
4
Button Hall
223W–223L career · 4 lines in 2022
22%78%<1%
3.60
4
Betsy Shane
14W–21L career · no lines in 2022
44%56%<1%
3.52
3.5
Deanna Lape
142W–96L career · 3 lines in 2022
1%90%10%
3.33
3.5
Sara Velarde
134W–92L career · 2 lines in 2022
2%94%3%
3.26
3.5
Lori Jensen
107W–86L career · 2 lines in 2022
3%94%2%
3.24
3.5
Bobbie West
0W–6L career · type S · no lines in 2022
19%81%<1%
3.11

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.