Teams

2 Bon Air Fenstermacher

2022 Richmond Combo Weekend · Richmond Combo 5.5 Women

9 players · average NTRP 2.70 / VIRGINIA

View scouting list →
Schedule7 played
2022-09-06vs 4 Westwood Kirkeby HUSTLAZLost 01
L#2 DoublesKristen Powers / Jennifer Moss vs Leigh Burris / Kristin Zach1-6, 6-7
2022-08-15vs 1 ACAC Tandett OverservedLost 01
L#2 DoublesKristen Powers / Sarah Woodroof vs Barbara Kasten / Jen Waller6-3, 3-6, 0-1
2022-08-14vs 5 Willow Oaks WilsonLost 01
L#2 DoublesKristen Powers / Julie Carter vs Emily Kennedy / Francesca Purcell4-6, 6-7
2022-08-07vs 3 Lakeside NaborsWon 10
W#1 DoublesKristen Powers / Greta Satterfield vs Cheryl Koenig / Vonda Kelly6-1, 6-3
2022-08-03vs 4 Westwood Kirkeby HUSTLAZLost 01
L#1 DoublesKristen Powers / Shelli Fenstermacher vs Jamie McLeod / Leigh Burris6-7, 0-6
2022-07-30vs 3 Lakeside NaborsWon 10
W#3 DoublesKristen Powers / Julie Carter vs Vonda Kelly / Delaney Mescall6-0, 6-2
2022-07-10vs 5 Willow Oaks WilsonWon 10
W#1 DoublesShelli Fenstermacher / Kristen Powers vs Jenny Norfleet / Laura Vetter6-1, 3-6, 1-0
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 Combo 5.5 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 2.62 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.

3.03
Kristen Powers
usually #1 Doubles 36%, also #3 Doubles 36% · published
2.83
Martha Rhodes
published
2.79
Donna Lawson
published 3
2.79
Sarah Woodroof
published
2.74
Catherine Hunt
published 3
2.58
2.33
Gretchen Sodamann
published 2.5
2.27
Greta Satterfield
published 2.5
2.24
Gail Covert
published 2.5
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.

Gail Covert + Gretchen Sodamann3351% games+4.9% vs expected
Greta Satterfield + Gail Covert044 matchesnot enough data
Martha Rhodes + Donna Lawson134 matchesnot enough data
Shelli Fenstermacher + Sarah Woodroof033 matchesnot enough data
Martha Rhodes + Sarah Woodroof213 matchesnot enough data
Donna Lawson + Sarah Woodroof213 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.

Kristen Powers
190W–194L career · 11 lines in 2022
<1%41%59%
3.03
Martha Rhodes
16W–23L career · no lines in 2022
1%90%9%
2.83
3
Donna Lawson
6W–14L career · no lines in 2022
1%94%5%
2.79
Sarah Woodroof
19W–22L career · no lines in 2022
1%94%5%
2.79
3
Catherine Hunt
6W–14L career · no lines in 2022
3%95%2%
2.74
Shelli Fenstermacher
9W–24L career · no lines in 2022
27%73%<1%
2.58
2.5
Gretchen Sodamann
16W–24L career · no lines in 2022
0%91%9%
2.33
2.5
Greta Satterfield
9W–13L career · no lines in 2022
0%96%4%
2.27
2.5
Gail Covert
15W–24L career · no lines in 2022
0%98%2%
2.24

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.