Teams

WI Combo 8.5W MALT Bathe

2026 WI Combo · WI Combo 8.5 Women

9 players · average NTRP 3.75 / WISCONSIN

View scouting list →
Schedule2 played
2026-08-25vs WI Combo 8.5W MALT WoodsWon 21
L#1 DoublesJessie Bathe / Morgan Wilson vs Zoe Tesone / Emily King3-6, 6-3, 0-1
W#2 DoublesRenee Nelson / Gina Kolpek vs Lisa Sanchez / Natalie Blonien6-2, 6-1
W#3 DoublesPatricia VanVoorhees / Karen Grimmer vs Debra Woods / Holly Barnish6-4, 4-6, 1-0
2026-08-20vs WI Combo 8.5W MALT BaugusLost 03
L#1 DoublesMorgan Wilson / Esra Alagoz vs Samantha Saetang / Christina Price0-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesElizabeth Reuter / Karen Grimmer vs Amberlee Baugus / Gillian Drier1-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesJessie Bathe / Dawn Blau vs Michelle Tallentyre / Joanna Fisch1-6, 1-6
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 standings3 teams · WI Combo 8.5 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1WI Combo 8.5W MALT Baugus1030013
2WI Combo 8.5W MALT Bathe000000
3WI Combo 8.5W MALT Woods0103636

Ordered by team wins, then losses, then sets lost — the order USTA uses to seed a flight. Individual wins are lines, not ties.

See the full flight, with every team’s record

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 3.81 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.

4.24
Morgan Wilson
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
4.05
Elizabeth Reuter
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.95
Esra Alagoz
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
3.92
Gina Kolpek
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.90
Renee Nelson
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.80
Patricia VanVoorhees
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.72
Jessie Bathe
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
3.47
Karen Grimmer
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
3.25
Dawn Blau
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
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.

Gina Kolpek + Jessie Bathe131052% games+7.4% vs expected
Karen Grimmer + Patricia VanVoorhees3546% games+5.1% vs expected
Patricia VanVoorhees + Esra Alagoz4552% games+4.1% vs expected
Renee Nelson + Jessie Bathe7453% games+4.0% vs expected
Renee Nelson + Gina Kolpek5361% games+3.8% vs expected
Patricia VanVoorhees + Gina Kolpek7260% games+3.1% vs expected
Patricia VanVoorhees + Jessie Bathe6547% games−5.1% vs expected
Renee Nelson + Patricia VanVoorhees134 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.

Morgan Wilson
128W–51L career · 2 lines in 2026
5%92%3%
4.24
Elizabeth Reuter
24W–18L career · 1 line in 2026
35%65%<1%
4.05
Esra Alagoz
67W–26L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%65%35%
3.95
Gina Kolpek
70W–61L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%71%29%
3.92
Renee Nelson
52W–39L career · 1 line in 2026
76%24%<1%
3.90
4
Patricia VanVoorhees
141W–122L career · 1 line in 2026
2%91%7%
3.80
Jessie Bathe
62W–63L career · 2 lines in 2026
5%92%2%
3.72
Karen Grimmer
29W–47L career · 6 lines in 2026
<1%60%40%
3.47
3.5
Dawn Blau
14W–28L career · 1 line in 2026
4%93%3%
3.25

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.