Teams

GTC NAVY

2023 TRIO - DEN · WOMEN 3.5 - TRIO

8 players · average NTRP 3.50 / COLORADO

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 →
Schedule5 played
2023-04-29vs WP REDLost 01
L#2 DoublesGeetha Sivanandam / Maeve Cohen vs Suzette Emerson / Derria Banta0-6, 6-4, 0-1
2023-04-21vs SKY BLUELost 02
L#1 DoublesJenn Roedel / Alice Choe vs Vicki Devine / Joy Kathleen Murphy1-6, 4-6
L#1 SinglesGeetha Sivanandam vs Suzi Janzen2-6, 0-6
2023-04-19vs CACM REDLost 01
L#2 DoublesEsther Song / Alice Choe vs Mary Deluccia / Midori Clark1-6, 3-6
2023-04-15vs DTC GREENSplit 11
L#1 DoublesElizabeth Belson / Maeve Cohen vs Laura Rogers / Sarah Killeen1-6, 2-6
W#1 SinglesJenn Roedel vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2023-04-08vs CP BLUEWon 20
W#1 SinglesGeetha Sivanandam vs Sarah Gilbert6-4, 6-1
W#2 DoublesJenn Roedel / Alice Choe vs Tammy Chamberlain / Erika Vincent6-3, 6-2
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 3.5 - TRIO 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 3.15 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.

3.23
Maeve Cohen
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.21
Jenn Roedel
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #1 Singles 33% · published 3.5
3.20
Geetha Sivanandam
usually #1 Singles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.19
Stephanie Li
published
3.19
Elizabeth Belson
published
3.10
Alice Choe
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.07
Esther Song
published
2.98
Caitlin Keys
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.

Geetha Sivanandam + Maeve Cohen3447% games+2.2% vs expected
Jenn Roedel + Maeve Cohen3543% games−3.1% vs expected
Jenn Roedel + Alice Choe51842% games−9.7% vs expected
Geetha Sivanandam + Jenn Roedel2543% gamesnot enough data
Geetha Sivanandam + Stephanie Li314 matchesnot enough data
Geetha Sivanandam + Elizabeth Belson134 matchesnot enough data
Caitlin Keys + Maeve Cohen033 matchesnot enough data
Geetha Sivanandam + Alice Choe033 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.

3.5
Maeve Cohen
31W–39L career · 2 lines in 2023
5%92%3%
3.23
3.5
Jenn Roedel
36W–52L career · 3 lines in 2023
6%92%2%
3.21
3.5
Geetha Sivanandam
69W–72L career · 3 lines in 2023
8%91%2%
3.20
Stephanie Li
3W–3L career · no lines in 2023
8%90%1%
3.19
Elizabeth Belson
14W–8L career · no lines in 2023
9%90%1%
3.19
3.5
Alice Choe
46W–79L career · 3 lines in 2023
23%77%<1%
3.10
Esther Song
15W–22L career · no lines in 2023
31%69%<1%
3.07
3.5
Caitlin Keys
4W–14L career · no lines in 2023
57%43%<1%
2.98

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.