Teams

14 Bon Air Rhodes

2025 Richmond Singles · Richmond Singles 3.0 Women

7 players · average NTRP 2.75 / VIRGINIA

View scouting list →
Schedule7 played
2025-11-05vs 20 Burkwood Lu GoldenLost 03
L#1 SinglesMartha Rhodes vs Tori Hylton3-6, 2-6
L#2 SinglesMelanie Agee-Wade vs Christine Paul0-6, 2-6
L#3 SinglesNadia Jomaa vs Jessica Golden0-6, 2-6
2025-11-04vs 16 WOCC Hamlin single ladiesSplit 11
W#1 SinglesEmily Larson vs Samantha Otero6-3, 6-3
L#2 SinglesGreta Satterfield vs Blair McDuff2-6, 1-6
2025-10-21vs 17 CCV PeanutsLost 12
L#1 SinglesEmily Larson vs Caroline Turner5-7, 0-6
W#2 SinglesRebecca Lowe vs Marlene Crockett6-1, 6-0
L#3 SinglesNadia Jomaa vs Lacy Briney0-6, 1-6
2025-10-18vs 18 Southampton Roper 3.0Lost 12
L#1 SinglesLaurel Wade vs Maegan Deibler2-6, 1-6
W#2 SinglesMartha Rhodes vs Jessica McAuliffe6-3, 2-6, 1-0
L#3 SinglesNadia Jomaa vs Kim Joffe0-6, 1-6
2025-10-14vs 15 Woodlake WhiteLost 03
L#1 SinglesEmily Larson vs Rochelle Preston3-6, 6-4, 0-1
L#2 SinglesGreta Satterfield vs Blanka White1-6, 2-6
L#3 SinglesMelanie Agee-Wade vs Jasmine Kaur2-6, 0-6
2025-09-30vs 11 Westwood DiMeglioLost 12
W#1 SinglesRebecca Lowe vs Ryan Kirtner6-0, 6-1
L#2 SinglesEmily Larson vs Mary Douglas Rice1-6, 3-6
L#3 SinglesMelanie Agee-Wade vs Alex Driscoll2-6, 1-6
2025-09-20vs 8 Belmont - NelsonLost 03
L#1 SinglesMartha Rhodes vs Rebecca Hughes3-6, 2-6
L#2 SinglesGreta Satterfield vs Melissa Lloyd0-6, 1-6
L#3 SinglesNadia Jomaa vs Conway Bowman1-6, 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 Richmond Singles 3.0 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 2.71 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.

3.46
Emily Larson
usually #1 Singles 75%, also #2 Singles 25% · published 3
3.31
Rebecca Lowe
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #2 Singles 50% · published
2.83
Martha Rhodes
usually #1 Singles 67%, also #2 Singles 33% · published
2.60
Laurel Wade
usually #1 Singles 100% · published
2.37
Melanie Agee-Wade
usually #3 Singles 67%, also #2 Singles 33% · published
2.27
Greta Satterfield
usually #2 Singles 100% · published 2.5
2.14
Nadia Jomaa
usually #3 Singles 100% · published
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
Emily Larson
6W–24L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%<1%>99%
3.46
Rebecca Lowe
23W–14L career · 2 lines in 2025
1%92%7%
3.31
Martha Rhodes
16W–23L career · 3 lines in 2025
1%90%9%
2.83
Laurel Wade
7W–3L career · 1 line in 2025
0%22%78%
2.60
Melanie Agee-Wade
9W–19L career · 3 lines in 2025
0%83%17%
2.37
2.5
Greta Satterfield
9W–13L career · 3 lines in 2025
0%96%4%
2.27
Nadia Jomaa
9W–20L career · 4 lines in 2025
0%>99%<1%
2.14

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.