Teams

MIT:Got Swing?:Potter/Saudade

2022 VT Tri-Level Women · 4.0 Women

6 players · average NTRP 3.75 / VERMONT

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2022-12-10vs ESB:Miss Hits:StrausserLost 01
L#1 DoublesKaren Lueders / Sarah Hopewell vs Edye Graning / Jennifer Weiss4-6, 7-5, 0-1
2022-11-05vs ESB:Hot Shots:EricksonLost 01
L#1 DoublesKaren Lueders / Sandra Nolte vs Lesli Nichols / Jude Melen3-6, 5-7
2022-10-23vs ESB:Buley/McDonnellLost 01
L#1 DoublesMary Saudade / Nancy Spears vs Lynn Bursell / Lynda Vankleeck6-1, 4-6, 0-1
W#1 DoublesSarah Hopewell / Sandra Nolte vs Cynthia Sherburne / Martha Small6-2, 6-1
2022-10-16vs ESB:Hot Shots:EricksonLost 01
L#1 DoublesHeather Potter / Nancy Spears vs Lesli Nichols / Jude Melen1-6, 1-6
2022-10-16vs ESB:Buley/McDonnellLost 01
L#1 DoublesKaren Lueders / Mary Saudade vs Deborah Buley / Marge McDonnell6-4, 2-6, 0-1
2022-10-09vs ESB:Miss Hits:StrausserWon 10
W#1 DoublesHeather Potter / Nancy Spears vs Aimee Babbott / Carol Bouyea6-1, 6-3
L#1 DoublesMary Saudade / Sarah Hopewell vs Martha Small / Katherine Arthaud6-3, 6-7, 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 4.0 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 3.50 estimated across 5 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.

3.68
Sandra Nolte
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.61
Sarah Hopewell
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.50
Nancy Spears
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.44
Mary Saudade
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.27
Heather Potter
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
Karen Lueders
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.

Karen Lueders + Mary Saudade3946% games−2.3% vs expected
Nancy Spears + Mary Saudade1838% games−11.6% vs expected
Heather Potter + Mary Saudade3838% games−15.9% vs expected
Heather Potter + Nancy Spears4253% gamesnot enough data
Sandra Nolte + Nancy Spears2346% gamesnot enough data
Karen Lueders + Nancy Spears314 matchesnot enough data
Sarah Hopewell + Mary Saudade213 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.

4
Sandra Nolte
68W–59L career · 2 lines in 2022
8%91%1%
3.68
Sarah Hopewell
14W–13L career · 3 lines in 2022
19%81%<1%
3.61
Nancy Spears
45W–61L career · 3 lines in 2022
<1%50%50%
3.50
Mary Saudade
20W–43L career · 3 lines in 2022
<1%67%33%
3.44
3.5
Heather Potter
20W–53L career · 2 lines in 2022
2%94%4%
3.27
Karen Lueders
38W–68L career · 3 lines in 2022
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.