Teams

Halverson

2025 Adult 18 & Over Winter · 3.0 Women

13 players · average NTRP 3.00 / NORTHERN

View scouting list →
Schedule2 played
2025-03-13vs Culligan CrushersLost 13
L#1 DoublesKatie Ahamed / Amara Chesson vs Eileen Stanley / Nancy Garrett2-6, 0-6
L#1 SinglesKelli Westenberg vs Becca Murphy5-7, 2-6
L#2 DoublesAnat Gold / Elizabeth Ciborowski vs Denise Hindt / Carol Culligan4-6, 1-6
W#2 SinglesHtoo Say vs Consuelo Gutierrez-Crosby7-5, 6-2
2025-02-06vs Culligan CrushersSplit 22
W#1 DoublesKatie Halverson / Katie Ahamed vs Kay Larson / Mari Nicole Kelly4-6, 6-3, 1-0
L#1 SinglesBetsy Lawton vs Denise Hindt1-2
W#2 DoublesGrace Knudsen / Elizabeth Ciborowski vs Lee Blons / Elyse Kharbanda6-1, 4-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesHtoo Say / Natalia Rodriguez vs Monica Raina / Rena Feldman4-6, 4-6
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 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 2.83 estimated across 10 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.

3.08
Htoo Say
usually #2 Singles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
2.98
Katie Ahamed
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.95
Katie Halverson
usually #3 Doubles 33%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
2.89
Grace Knudsen
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.81
Kelli Westenberg
usually #1 Singles 100% · published
2.80
Laura Farrington
published
Betsy Lawton
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 3
2.75
Ann Fort
published 3
2.73
Elizabeth Ciborowski
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.69
Anat Gold
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.67
Amara Chesson
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
Natalia Rodriguez
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Wendy Bloom
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.

Amara Chesson + Katie Ahamed6356% games+7.3% vs expected
Grace Knudsen + Elizabeth Ciborowski4159% games+4.1% vs expected
Laura Farrington + Ann Fort113040% games+1.7% 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.

Htoo Say
7W–10L career · 2 lines in 2025
29%71%<1%
3.08
Katie Ahamed
12W–3L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%55%45%
2.98
Katie Halverson
22W–25L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%65%35%
2.95
Grace Knudsen
14W–8L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%78%22%
2.89
Kelli Westenberg
21W–18L career · 1 line in 2025
1%90%9%
2.81
Laura Farrington
11W–30L career · no lines in 2025
2%91%8%
2.80
3
Betsy Lawton
0W–1L career · 1 line in 2025
not enough data
3
Ann Fort
11W–30L career · no lines in 2025
4%93%3%
2.75
Elizabeth Ciborowski
7W–10L career · 2 lines in 2025
5%92%3%
2.73
3
Anat Gold
6W–22L career · 1 line in 2025
9%90%1%
2.69
3
Amara Chesson
13W–15L career · 1 line in 2025
12%87%1%
2.67
Natalia Rodriguez
0W–1L career · 1 line in 2025
not enough data
Wendy Bloom
2W–4L career · no lines in 2025
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.