Teams

Team 6 Hirzel

2025 NOVA Adult 18 & Over Weekday · NOVA Adult 18 & Over Weekday 3.5 Women

13 players · average NTRP 3.00 / VIRGINIA

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 →
Schedule4 played
2025-06-02vs Team 4 Net NinjasLost 01
L#2 DoublesSarah Helou / Mindy Rattan vs Wendy Rose / Beth Kiesner1-6, 0-6
2025-05-12vs Team 5 NovaKaneLost 01
L#1 DoublesKristy Creagh / Sarah Helou vs Kerry Smith / Nami Imaizumi2-6, 1-6
2025-04-14vs Team 2 Love BitesLost 01
L#2 DoublesBarbara Timblin / Sarah Helou vs Julie Collier / Lauren Malone7-6, 1-6
2025-04-03vs Team 3 Ace Kickers 3.5Lost 01
L#2 DoublesAngelena Hirzel / Sarah Helou vs Angela Carbone / Mandy Bertin0-6, 2-6
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 NOVA Adult 18 & Over Weekday 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 2.73 estimated across 13 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.

3.11
Sarah Helou
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 3
2.89
Angelena Hirzel
published 3
2.86
Ann Bauer
published 3
2.78
Jacquelyn McVey
published
2.74
Taylor Lothliam
published
2.72
Sara Trelawney
published
2.68
Mindy Rattan
published
2.67
Mary Leigh Morrison
published
2.67
Susannah Porteous
published
2.65
Barbara Timblin
published 3
2.65
Kristy Creagh
published
2.54
Allison Hamilton
published 3
2.49
Lynn Stattel
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.

Sarah Helou + Kristy Creagh123 matchesnot enough data
Mindy Rattan + Angelena Hirzel213 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.

3
Sarah Helou
29W–22L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%21%79%
3.11
3
Angelena Hirzel
4W–3L career · no lines in 2025
<1%79%21%
2.89
3
Ann Bauer
6W–8L career · no lines in 2025
<1%83%16%
2.86
Jacquelyn McVey
2W–3L career · no lines in 2025
2%92%6%
2.78
Taylor Lothliam
5W–8L career · no lines in 2025
4%93%3%
2.74
Sara Trelawney
1W–2L career · no lines in 2025
6%92%2%
2.72
Mindy Rattan
4W–4L career · no lines in 2025
10%89%1%
2.68
Mary Leigh Morrison
8W–26L career · no lines in 2025
11%88%1%
2.67
Susannah Porteous
0W–3L career · no lines in 2025
12%87%1%
2.67
3
Barbara Timblin
2W–7L career · no lines in 2025
13%86%1%
2.65
Kristy Creagh
3W–11L career · no lines in 2025
15%85%1%
2.65
3
Allison Hamilton
3W–7L career · no lines in 2025
39%61%<1%
2.54
Lynn Stattel
2W–2L career · no lines in 2025
54%46%<1%
2.49

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.