Teams

SFT:Spark Green:Sideman

2024 EMA Adult 18 & Over Women · 3.0 Women

16 players · average NTRP 3.20 / EASTERN MASSACHUSETTS

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
L#1 DoublesJeanne Woelfel / Margaret Pangione vs Caitlin Doran-Serafino / Kristen Luongo1-6, 1-6
W#2 SinglesBrenda Rugg vs Holly Tomes7-5, 2-5, 1-0
2024-07-24vs SFT:Spark Red:LambertLost 02
L#2 DoublesDorian Brown / Frances Fusaro vs Laurie Wentzell-Ryan / Kate Lambert1-6, 0-6
L#3 DoublesTracy Shea / Margaret Pangione vs Beth Humberd / Kelli Mokeler1-6, 4-6
2024-06-19vs IRCC:Indian Ridge Green:EdelmannSplit 22
W#1 DoublesRachel Cormier / Charlene Deroche vs Kristina Kashanek / Nicole Guilmartin6-2, 6-1
L#2 DoublesTracy Shea / Dorian Brown vs K Hunt / Susyn Lichtenberg5-7, 3-6
W#2 SinglesBrenda Rugg vs Kristin Strellis6-3, 6-4
L#3 DoublesJeanne Woelfel / Margaret Pangione vs Caitlin Welteroth / Miranda Kopnisky1-6, 0-6
W#1 DoublesCharlene Deroche / Rachel Cormier vs Amanda Gallagher / Lauren Satyshur6-2, 6-4
W#2 DoublesDENISE NEWELL / Elaine Faria vs Kristen Luongo / Tiana Rick7-6, 4-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesTina Endicott / Brenda Rugg vs Holly Tomes / Leann Melvin1-6, 3-6
2024-05-22vs SFT:Spark Red:LambertLost 23
W#1 DoublesElaine Faria / Rachel Cormier vs Joan Regan / Kathy Hocking6-3, 6-3
L#1 SinglesCharlene Deroche vs Beth Humberd1-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesDENISE NEWELL / Tina Endicott vs Donna Arnold / Nicole Friel5-7, 5-7
W#2 SinglesBrenda Rugg vs Anastasia Packard6-0, 4-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesMargaret Pangione / Jeanne Woelfel vs Nicole Ehrie / Katie Grimes0-6, 2-6
2024-05-15vs IRCC:Indian Ridge Green:EdelmannLost 12
L#1 DoublesRachel Cormier / DENISE NEWELL vs Kristina Kashanek / Kristin Strellis2-6, 6-3, 1-0
W#1 SinglesCharlene Deroche vs K Hunt6-2, 6-3
L#3 DoublesMargaret Pangione / Jeanne Woelfel vs Nicole Guilmartin / Caitlin Welteroth0-6, 7-6, 0-1
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 2.79 estimated across 9 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.

4.45
Evan Sideman
published
Adam Molda
published 4
3.06
Rachel Cormier
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.88
Tracy Shea
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 17% · published
2.78
Brenda Rugg
usually #2 Singles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 3
Catherine Flood
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.74
Elaine Faria
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
2.69
Charlene Deroche
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #1 Singles 50% · published 3
2.37
DENISE NEWELL
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.25
Margaret Pangione
usually #3 Doubles 80%, also #1 Doubles 20% · published
1.93
Jeanne Woelfel
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
Dorian Brown
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Elisabeth Abbe
published
Frances Fusaro
usually #1 Singles 60%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published
Rolin Lu
published
Tina Endicott
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · 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.

Charlene Deroche + Elaine Faria9355% games+3.0% vs expected
Margaret Pangione + Jeanne Woelfel0523% games−28.8% vs expected
Elisabeth Abbe + Charlene Deroche5157% gamesnot enough data
Dorian Brown + Elisabeth Abbe1446% gamesnot enough data
DENISE NEWELL + Charlene Deroche134 matchesnot enough data
DENISE NEWELL + Elaine Faria134 matchesnot enough data
Tracy Shea + Catherine Flood404 matchesnot enough data
Charlene Deroche + Rachel Cormier303 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.

Evan Sideman
75W–34L career · no lines in 2024
<1%64%36%
4.45
4
Adam Molda
29W–23L career · type M · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Rachel Cormier
77W–54L career · 4 lines in 2024
34%65%<1%
3.06
Tracy Shea
22W–19L career · 6 lines in 2024
<1%79%20%
2.88
3
Brenda Rugg
38W–23L career · 4 lines in 2024
2%92%6%
2.78
3
Catherine Flood
7W–0L career · 1 line in 2024
not enough data
Elaine Faria
17W–13L career · 2 lines in 2024
5%92%3%
2.74
3
Charlene Deroche
53W–36L career · 4 lines in 2024
8%90%1%
2.69
3
DENISE NEWELL
3W–26L career · 3 lines in 2024
82%18%<1%
2.37
Margaret Pangione
6W–13L career · 5 lines in 2024
0%97%3%
2.25
Jeanne Woelfel
1W–7L career · 4 lines in 2024
0%>99%<1%
1.93
Dorian Brown
10W–21L career · 2 lines in 2024
not enough data
Elisabeth Abbe
8W–15L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Frances Fusaro
2W–12L career · 5 lines in 2024
not enough data
Rolin Lu
0W–1L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Tina Endicott
1W–9L career · 2 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.