Teams

Racqueteers 3.0

2026 Washington D.C. Singles · Washington D.C. Singles 3.0 Women

6 players · average NTRP 3.00 / 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 →
Schedule8 played
2026-08-29vs WangLost 03
L#1 SinglesKayla Lesesne vs Chloe Han4-6, 2-3
L#2 SinglesEva Habash vs Miranda Liu1-6, 1-6
L#3 SinglesAndrea Torres vs Xin Guan0-6, 1-6
2026-08-23vs The NETworkSplit 11
W#1 SinglesKayla Lesesne vs Kali Keller6-4, 4-1
L#2 SinglesAngela Sharma vs Enitan Otunla5-7, 2-3
2026-08-09vs WangLost 12
L#1 SinglesAngela Sharma vs Miranda Liu2-6, 0-6
W#2 SinglesKayla Lesesne vs Xin Guan6-2, 4-1
L#3 SinglesEva Habash vs Anusha Prasad3-6, 2-6
2026-08-01vs Spin & TonicWon 20
W#1 SinglesKayla Lesesne vs Penelope Wilson6-0, 6-2
W#2 SinglesEmily Schabacker vs Ashton Brown6-0, 4-5
2026-07-26vs 3.0 Lady TerminettersWon 10
W#2 SinglesEmily Schabacker vs Natalie Sebeck6-3, 3-2
2026-07-13vs Killer BeesLost 02
L#1 SinglesEmily Schabacker vs Sarah Guggenheimer4-6, 0-4
L#2 SinglesEveline Shum vs Maeve Dolan1-6, 3-5
2026-06-27vs DC Tennis ClubWon 10
W#1 SinglesEmily Schabacker vs Kaitlin Bell6-3, 5-2
2026-06-21vs Queen BeesLost 12
L#1 SinglesAngela Sharma vs Rachael Uhland4-6, 4-5
L#2 SinglesEva Habash vs Susan Curran7-6, 0-2
W#3 SinglesEveline Shum vs Mominah Farrukh6-1, 6-0
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 standings6 teams · Washington D.C. Singles 3.0 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Racqueteers 3.007101120155
23.0 Lady Terminetters0791225188
3Killer Bees0816817163
4The NETwork08121222184
5Queen Bees0881633202
6Spin & Tonic0851937242

Ordered by team wins, then losses, then sets lost — the order USTA uses to seed a flight. Individual wins are lines, not ties.

See the full flight, with every team’s record

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 2.80 estimated across 6 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.

3.09
Kayla Lesesne
usually #1 Singles 75%, also #2 Singles 25% · published
2.94
Emily Schabacker
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #2 Singles 50% · published 3
2.91
Angela Sharma
usually #1 Singles 67%, also #2 Singles 33% · published 3
2.69
Andrea Torres
usually #3 Singles 100% · published 3
2.60
Eva Habash
usually #2 Singles 67%, also #3 Singles 33% · published
2.54
Eveline Shum
usually #3 Singles 50%, also #2 Singles 50% · 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.

Eveline Shum + Angela Sharma123 matchesnot enough data
Eveline Shum + Emily Schabacker213 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.

Kayla Lesesne
11W–2L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%25%75%
3.09
3
Emily Schabacker
158W–173L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%65%34%
2.94
3
Angela Sharma
57W–78L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%73%27%
2.91
3
Andrea Torres
6W–13L career · 1 line in 2026
9%90%1%
2.69
Eva Habash
3W–7L career · 3 lines in 2026
23%77%<1%
2.60
3
Eveline Shum
46W–87L career · 2 lines in 2026
39%61%<1%
2.54

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.