Teams

HCC Mangin/Kersey

2025 Richmond Tri-Level Weekday · Richmond Tri-Level Weekday 4.0, 3.5, 3.0

13 players · average NTRP 3.60 / VIRGINIA

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2025-09-05vs MTC PattersonLost 01
L#1 DoublesBetsy Kersey / Sally Caldwell vs Lindsay Hardage / Laurie Miller4-6, 6-4, 0-1
2025-08-29vs TDC Spillare/Wyman Tri LevelLost 01
L#1 DoublesCarrie Boyd / Jane Kauder vs Irina Schaffernoth / Angela Woods6-3, 3-6, 0-1
2025-08-15vs Salisbury - OtooleLost 01
L#1 DoublesSally Caldwell / Julie Stivers vs Michelle Nelson / Laney Hyatt3-6, 5-7
2025-08-08vs ACAC QuilezWon 10
W#1 DoublesSally Caldwell / Betsy Kersey vs Heather Colberg / Julie Ruth6-4, 1-6, 1-0
2025-08-01vs HCC Stone Weekday Tri-LevelWon 10
W#1 DoublesJane Kauder / Sally Caldwell vs Grace Kim / Pam Vossenberg1-6, 6-3, 1-0
2025-07-29vs SRA Roper CrewsWon 10
W#1 DoublesJane Kauder / Carrie Boyd vs Veronica Cummings / Kandyce Baker6-2, 6-4
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 Richmond Tri-Level Weekday 4.0, 3.5, 3.0 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 3.19 estimated across 11 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.

3.83
Julie Stivers
published
Betsy Kersey
published 4
3.69
Sally Caldwell
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.67
Jane Kauder
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.47
Mary Beth Scott
published
3.33
Lisa Frazier
published
3.01
Elizabeth Wiertel
published
2.98
Stacey Haug
published
2.90
Tiffany Dowd
published
2.78
Nancy Hahn
published
2.75
AIMEE DABNEY
published 3
2.69
Alexia Gerczak
published 3
Susan Mangin
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.

Elizabeth Wiertel + Stacey Haug3256% games+11.3% vs expected
Nancy Hahn + Alexia Gerczak4349% games−0.5% vs expected
Jane Kauder + Sally Caldwell303 matchesnot enough data
Nancy Hahn + AIMEE DABNEY213 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.

Julie Stivers
14W–3L career · no lines in 2025
1%88%12%
3.83
4
Betsy Kersey
1W–0L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
4
Sally Caldwell
42W–43L career · 4 lines in 2025
9%90%1%
3.69
4
Jane Kauder
49W–36L career · 3 lines in 2025
12%87%1%
3.67
Mary Beth Scott
13W–3L career · no lines in 2025
<1%59%41%
3.47
Lisa Frazier
17W–12L career · no lines in 2025
1%87%12%
3.33
Elizabeth Wiertel
28W–21L career · no lines in 2025
<1%48%52%
3.01
Stacey Haug
20W–18L career · no lines in 2025
<1%57%43%
2.98
Tiffany Dowd
22W–13L career · no lines in 2025
<1%77%23%
2.90
Nancy Hahn
16W–11L career · no lines in 2025
2%92%5%
2.78
3
AIMEE DABNEY
13W–12L career · no lines in 2025
4%93%4%
2.75
3
Alexia Gerczak
8W–12L career · no lines in 2025
9%90%1%
2.69
Susan Mangin
2W–0L 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.