Teams

MCAC:Cornu:Cornu

2024 Cape Tri-Level 18 & Over Women · 3.0 Women 1

6 players · average NTRP 2.83 / EASTERN MASSACHUSETTS

View scouting list →
Schedule12 played
2024-08-21vs MCAC:Silva:SilvaLost 01
L#1 DoublesMartha Lane / Kelley Doherty vs Bianca Silva / STEFANIE FOX2-6, 2-6
2024-08-14vs MCAC:Levitan:LevitanLost 01
L#1 DoublesKelley Doherty / Ann Kolakowski vs Lisa-Holly Flaherty / Doreen Levitan2-6, 4-5, 0-1
2024-08-07vs MCAC:Sia:SiaLost 01
L#1 DoublesRose Cornu / Ann Kolakowski vs Cindy Sia / Kara Rinehard4-6, 2-3
2024-07-31vs MCAC:Eagan:EaganWon 10
W#1 DoublesAnn Kolakowski / Martha Lane vs Peggy Eagan / Antonia Kenny6-3, 3-3, 1-0
2024-07-17vs MCAC:Silva:SilvaWon 10
W#1 DoublesRose Cornu / Carolyn Watts vs Ires Todd / Amita Bhatt6-1, 6-1
2024-07-10vs MCAC:Levitan:LevitanLost 01
L#1 DoublesCharlotte Degen / Kelley Doherty vs Carolyn Hutchings / Doreen Levitan1-6, 0-6
2024-06-27vs MCAC:Eagan:EaganWon 10
W#1 DoublesRose Cornu / Carolyn Watts vs Betsy Casey / Josephine MacDonald7-6, 6-1
2024-06-26vs MCAC:Sia:SiaWon 10
W#1 DoublesRose Cornu / Carolyn Watts vs Kara Rinehard / Judith Andrews7-5, 6-2
2024-06-05vs MCAC:Silva:SilvaWon 10
W#1 DoublesRose Cornu / Carolyn Watts vs Ires Todd / STEFANIE FOX6-1, 3-5, 1-0
2024-06-02vs MCAC:Levitan:LevitanLost 01
L#1 DoublesMartha Lane / Kelley Doherty vs Lisa-Holly Flaherty / Doreen Levitan5-7, 2-3
2024-05-22vs MCAC:Sia:SiaLost 01
L#1 DoublesAnn Kolakowski / Carolyn Watts vs Dianne Feldman / Laurie Stillwell3-6, 6-3, 0-1
2024-05-15vs MCAC:Eagan:EaganLost 01
L#1 DoublesCharlotte Degen / Martha Lane vs Betsy Casey / Antonia Kenny1-6, 0-6
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 3.0 Women 1 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 2.58 estimated across 3 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.

Carolyn Watts
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.66
Rose Cornu
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.62
Ann Kolakowski
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.45
Charlotte Degen
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 2.5
Kelley Doherty
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Martha Lane
usually #1 Doubles 100% · 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.

Carolyn Watts + Rose Cornu404 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
Carolyn Watts
6W–3L career · 5 lines in 2024
not enough data
Rose Cornu
9W–11L career · 5 lines in 2024
13%86%1%
2.66
3
Ann Kolakowski
2W–7L career · 4 lines in 2024
19%81%<1%
2.62
2.5
Charlotte Degen
16W–32L career · 2 lines in 2024
0%63%37%
2.45
Kelley Doherty
0W–4L career · 4 lines in 2024
not enough data
Martha Lane
1W–3L career · 4 lines in 2024
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.