Teams

LoVV

2022 DC WTA Adult 18 & Over Spring · DC WTA Adult 18 & Over 3.5 Women

19 players · average NTRP 3.58 / WASHINGTON D.C.

No matches recorded for this roster in this league — it may be a placeholder registration, or the season may not have started.

View scouting list →
Schedule7 played
2022-06-25vs Serve OnWon 10
W#3 DoublesCathy Huh / PAULA SMITH vs Carmen Milam / Nicole Ifill7-5, 6-1
2022-06-04vs Double ShotsWon 10
W#1 DoublesBernadette Walker / Nicola Goren vs Jamescha Johnson / Sandra Peterson4-6, 6-1, 1-0
2022-05-22vs Net NeutralityLost 01
L#1 DoublesPAULA SMITH / Tynika Wilson vs Kathryn Codd / Julia Benbenek4-6, 5-4
2022-05-21vs Serving LoveWon 10
W#1 DoublesPAULA SMITH / Mekkla Thompson vs Daphne Fuller / Lucy Hurd7-5, 3-2
2022-05-14vs 40 LOVELost 01
L#2 DoublesPAULA SMITH / Tynika Wilson vs Jemine Bryon / Rebecca Wuren5-7, 1-3
2022-05-07vs Serve OnLost 01
L#2 DoublesTynika Wilson / PAULA SMITH vs Rosemary McEnery / Pilar Falo3-6, 1-4
2022-04-23vs Double ShotsWon 20
W#1 DoublesJulie Ische / Leslie Marbury vs Alissa Lee / Mary Binecki6-7, 3-1
W#2 SinglesJothi Nedungadi vs LaShonne Barnes6-2, 6-3
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 DC WTA Adult 18 & Over 3.5 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 3.36 estimated across 14 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.

3.74
PAULA SMITH
usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published
3.68
Valerie Ciccone
usually #3 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.68
Bennie Blackley
usually #1 Doubles 31%, also #2 Doubles 31% · published 4
3.42
Bernadette Walker
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.34
Ruxandra Badiu
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.29
Natasha Rones
usually #3 Doubles 57%, also #2 Doubles 43% · published 3.5
3.28
Cynthia Robinette
published 3.5
3.28
Sarah Speirs
published
3.27
Andaiye Hamilton
usually #3 Doubles 40%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
3.27
Nicola Goren
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.26
Shelley Puterman
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 17% · published 3.5
Andrea Motley
published 3.5
3.25
Gretchen Teel
usually #3 Doubles 33%, also #2 Singles 33% · published 3.5
3.12
Karen King
published
3.11
Mary Beth Etherton
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
Jothi Nedungadi
usually #2 Singles 100% · published
Julie Ische
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Leslie Marbury
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.

Bernadette Walker + Nicola Goren5156% games+3.4% vs expected
Bernadette Walker + Natasha Rones5255% games+2.6% vs expected
Andaiye Hamilton + Natasha Rones241653% games−2.1% vs expected
Mary Beth Etherton + Shelley Puterman71347% games−11.2% vs expected
Gretchen Teel + Shelley Puterman8258% gamesnot enough data
Ruxandra Badiu + Natasha Rones4159% gamesnot enough data
Ruxandra Badiu + Valerie Ciccone224 matchesnot enough data
Bernadette Walker + Andaiye Hamilton404 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.

PAULA SMITH
48W–32L career · 5 lines in 2022
3%94%2%
3.74
4
Valerie Ciccone
133W–102L career · 6 lines in 2022
8%91%1%
3.68
4
Bennie Blackley
149W–95L career · 13 lines in 2022
9%91%1%
3.68
3.5
Bernadette Walker
28W–21L career · 1 line in 2022
<1%74%26%
3.42
3.5
Ruxandra Badiu
478W–217L career · 4 lines in 2022
<1%88%11%
3.34
3.5
Natasha Rones
212W–124L career · 7 lines in 2022
1%94%5%
3.29
3.5
Cynthia Robinette
13W–13L career · no lines in 2022
1%94%5%
3.28
Sarah Speirs
33W–12L career · no lines in 2022
2%94%5%
3.28
3.5
Andaiye Hamilton
305W–151L career · 5 lines in 2022
2%94%4%
3.27
Nicola Goren
14W–11L career · 1 line in 2022
2%94%4%
3.27
3.5
Shelley Puterman
86W–69L career · 6 lines in 2022
2%94%3%
3.26
3.5
Andrea Motley
1W–4L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
3.5
Isadora Prata Thisted
2W–9L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
3.5
Gretchen Teel
144W–114L career · 3 lines in 2022
3%95%2%
3.25
Karen King
1W–2L career · no lines in 2022
19%81%<1%
3.12
3.5
Mary Beth Etherton
141W–140L career · 3 lines in 2022
20%80%<1%
3.11
Jothi Nedungadi
15W–10L career · 1 line in 2022
not enough data
Julie Ische
1W–0L career · 1 line in 2022
not enough data
Leslie Marbury
1W–0L career · 1 line 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.