Teams

CTucker/LSmith (Carmel)

2025 Singles 40 & Over League · 40 & Over Singles 3.5 Women - Mon PM

7 players · average NTRP 3.30 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule7 played
2025-07-14vs DCastain (WSRC)Won 10
W#2 SinglesLaurie Diman vs Kathleen O'Donnell7-6, 7-5
2025-07-07vs KAllen/Moser (Raintree)Lost 01
L#3 SinglesTricia Magee vs Hilda Austin6-4, 1-6, 0-1
2025-06-30vs KHeidkamp (PCC)Lost 02
L#1 SinglesKatie O'Shea vs Charlotte Renner6-3, 3-6, 0-1
L#3 SinglesLaurie Diman vs Lisa Long4-6, 6-1, 0-1
2025-06-23vs LPinzon (Life Time)Lost 01
L#2 SinglesKatie O'Shea vs Melanie Rebosa3-6, 6-1, 0-1
2025-06-09vs DCastain (WSRC)Lost 02
L#2 SinglesKatie O'Shea vs Tamara Gallagher3-6, 6-3, 0-1
L#3 SinglesTricia Magee vs April Greer1-6, 3-6
2025-06-02vs KAllen/Moser (Raintree)Lost 01
L#2 SinglesChelsea Rhodes vs Rona Karacaova3-6, 1-6
2025-05-19vs KHeidkamp (PCC)Split 11
W#2 SinglesKatie O'Shea vs Kristin Heidkamp6-1, 7-5
L#3 SinglesChelsea Rhodes vs Charlotte Renner5-7, 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 40 & Over Singles 3.5 Women - Mon PM 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 3.25 estimated across 7 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.

3.59
Molly Dwyer
published
3.54
Callie Tucker
published 3.5
3.33
Katie O'Shea
usually #2 Singles 75%, also #1 Singles 25% · published 3.5
3.26
Sarah Soule
published
3.06
Laurie Diman
usually #3 Singles 50%, also #2 Singles 50% · published 3
3.01
Chelsea Rhodes
usually #3 Singles 50%, also #2 Singles 50% · published 3.5
2.99
Tricia Magee
usually #3 Singles 100% · published 3
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.

Chelsea Rhodes + Laurie Diman8354% games+0.3% vs expected
Laurie Diman + Tricia Magee242251% games−3.6% vs expected
Chelsea Rhodes + Tricia Magee404 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.

Molly Dwyer
15W–5L career · no lines in 2025
<1%<1%>99%
3.59
3.5
Callie Tucker
7W–1L career · no lines in 2025
<1%39%61%
3.54
3.5
Katie O'Shea
100W–40L career · 4 lines in 2025
1%88%11%
3.33
Sarah Soule
6W–4L career · no lines in 2025
<1%3%97%
3.26
3
Laurie Diman
121W–83L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%34%66%
3.06
3.5
Chelsea Rhodes
64W–39L career · 2 lines in 2025
46%54%<1%
3.01
3
Tricia Magee
122W–94L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%53%47%
2.99

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.