Teams

Stevenson/Bourland

2022 One Doubles · 3.0 Women

3 players · average NTRP 3.33 · USTA/PACIFIC NW / NORTHERN OREGON

View scouting list →
Scouting

Roster averages 3.13 estimated across 3 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.

3.41
Jennifer Stevenson
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.27
Christine Bennett-Hanes
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
2.72
Madeleine Bourland
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
Results5 ties
2022-08-02Won 10
W#1 DoublesChristine Bennett-Hanes / Jennifer Stevenson vs Kayla Casebeer / Mihee Park2-6, 7-6, 1-0
2022-08-01Lost 01
L#1 DoublesChristine Bennett-Hanes / Jennifer Stevenson vs Jane King Ayers / Ann-Marie Lundberg2-6, 7-6, 1-0
2022-07-20Won 10
W#1 DoublesJennifer Stevenson / Madeleine Bourland vs Wanda Ng / Abbie Hover6-2, 2-6, 1-0
2022-06-29Lost 01
L#1 DoublesJennifer Stevenson / Madeleine Bourland vs Victoria Cartwright / Kerri Patrick6-3, 5-7, 1-0
2022-06-25Won 10
W#1 DoublesChristine Bennett-Hanes / Erin Dineen vs Adela Dalmau / Laxmi Vishwanathan6-2, 7-6
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.
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.

3.5
Jennifer Stevenson
91W–97L career
0%96%4%
3.41
3.5
Christine Bennett-Hanes
84W–61L career
0%99%0%
3.27
3
Madeleine Bourland
64W–53L career
2%98%0%
2.72

Three percentages are the year-end projection — chance of moving down, staying, moving up — and the number on the right is our estimated dynamic rating, which USTA never publishes. 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.