Teams

ACAC Jones / Weddle

2021 Richmond Adult 40 & Over Weekday · Richmond Weekday Adult 40 & Over Women 3.0

12 players · average NTRP 3.36 / VIRGINIA

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2021-07-29vs HCC MorganWon 10
W#1 SinglesDina Weddle vs Thu-Hang Groome6-0, 6-0
2021-07-22vs Willow Oaks StringerWon 10
W#1 DoublesJennifer Funk / Martinique Kandl vs Sule Sauvigne / Beth Kelly6-4, 6-2
2021-07-19Won 10
W#1 SinglesDina Weddle vs Sarah Thomas6-1, 7-5
2021-07-15vs TDC Spillare 3.0Split 11
W#1 SinglesDina Weddle vs Megan Lyness6-2, 6-1
L#2 DoublesJennifer Funk / Martinique Kandl vs Tonya Atack / Fran Wigner2-6, 6-4, 0-1
2021-07-08vs ACAC HarrisonWon 10
W#2 SinglesDina Weddle vs Elizabeth Coleman6-3, 5-7, 1-0
2021-07-01Won 10
W#1 DoublesJackie Granger / Martinique Kandl vs Shilpa Damle / Kellie Lempner6-0, 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 Richmond Weekday Adult 40 & Over Women 3.0 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 3.07 estimated across 12 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.

3.51
Dina Weddle
usually #1 Singles 75%, also #2 Singles 25% · published 4
3.46
Martinique Kandl
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.31
Lisa Smithson
published
3.29
Anne Townsend
published 3.5
3.23
Nikki Callaghan
published
3.09
Carla Shaffer
published 3.5
3.06
Jennifer Funk
published
2.94
Amy Romero
published 3
2.85
Lim Han
published
2.82
Mari Litz
published
2.66
Jackie Granger
published 3
2.62
Ali Silva
published 3
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.

Amy Romero + Anne Townsend224 matchesnot enough data
Lisa Smithson + Anne Townsend303 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
Dina Weddle
148W–61L career · 4 lines in 2021
48%52%<1%
3.51
3.5
Martinique Kandl
167W–65L career · 3 lines in 2021
<1%63%37%
3.46
Lisa Smithson
16W–7L career · no lines in 2021
1%92%7%
3.31
3.5
Anne Townsend
33W–23L career · no lines in 2021
1%94%5%
3.29
Nikki Callaghan
6W–4L career · no lines in 2021
4%94%2%
3.23
3.5
Carla Shaffer
23W–29L career · no lines in 2021
24%76%<1%
3.09
Jennifer Funk
7W–11L career · no lines in 2021
33%67%<1%
3.06
3
Amy Romero
21W–23L career · no lines in 2021
<1%67%33%
2.94
Lim Han
1W–9L career · no lines in 2021
87%13%<1%
2.85
Mari Litz
8W–11L career · no lines in 2021
1%91%9%
2.82
3
Jackie Granger
20W–14L career · no lines in 2021
11%89%<1%
2.66
3
Ali Silva
8W–15L career · no lines in 2021
18%82%<1%
2.62

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.