Teams

TAG BLUE

2023 CTA WOMEN'S SUMMER DAYTIME - NOCO · WOMEN 4.0 - SUMMER DAYTIME - NOCO

6 players · average NTRP 4.00 / 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 →
Schedule6 played
2023-08-10vs MLF YELLOWSplit 11
W#1 SinglesCYNDI ROTHMAN vs Carrie Galyardt7-6, 6-2
L#2 DoublesHelen Crews / Rachel Robertson vs Sarah Soffe / Rachel Levalley6-2, 4-6, 0-1
2023-08-03vs CSU GOLDWon 10
W#2 DoublesVicki Davis / Cheri Gipson vs Eileen Heath / Christine Houldsworth6-1, 2-6, 1-0
2023-07-27vs FCCC REDWon 20
W#1 DoublesVicki Davis / Sara Fedel vs Amy Anderson / Dierdre Sadeh6-3, 7-5
W#1 SinglesHelen Crews vs Nancy Kepner7-5, 6-3
2023-07-20Lost 02
L#1 DoublesMary Wilson / Cheri Gipson vs Wendy Thomas / Gina Bevino1-6, 2-6
L#1 SinglesHelen Crews vs Nancy Williams6-4, 5-7, 0-1
2023-07-06vs MLF YELLOWLost 02
L#1 DoublesHelen Crews / Cheri Gipson vs Erin Hauser-Roe / Trudy Samuelson2-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesSara Fedel / Ann Smerud vs Sarah Soffe / Becky Rosetti-Solley1-6, 4-6
2023-06-29Split 11
W#1 DoublesMary Wilson / Helen Crews vs Ashley Treat / Wendy Clark6-3, 6-4
L#1 SinglesSara Fedel vs Kim Phillips1-6, 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 WOMEN 4.0 - SUMMER DAYTIME - NOCO 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 3.59 estimated across 6 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.

3.76
Vicki Davis
published
3.67
CYNDI ROTHMAN
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 4
3.58
Sara Fedel
usually #1 Singles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.55
Helen Crews
usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #1 Singles 40% · published 4
3.52
Cheri Gipson
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.46
Rachel Robertson
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.

Cheri Gipson + Helen Crews6549% games−17.9% vs expected
Cheri Gipson + CYNDI ROTHMAN224 matchesnot enough data
Vicki Davis + Cheri Gipson123 matchesnot enough data
Vicki Davis + CYNDI ROTHMAN123 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.

Vicki Davis
29W–28L career · no lines in 2023
3%92%4%
3.76
4
CYNDI ROTHMAN
68W–70L career · 1 line in 2023
12%87%1%
3.67
4
Sara Fedel
21W–42L career · 3 lines in 2023
29%71%<1%
3.58
4
Helen Crews
61W–54L career · 5 lines in 2023
37%63%<1%
3.55
4
Cheri Gipson
45W–59L career · 3 lines in 2023
43%56%<1%
3.52
Rachel Robertson
21W–31L career · no lines in 2023
<1%61%38%
3.46

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.