← Teams

WHRC-Potter

2022 Mixed 18 & Over · 6.0 Mixed

11 players · average NTRP 3.1 · USTA/PACIFIC NW / NORTHERN OREGON

View scouting list →
Scouting

Roster averages 2.88 estimated across 8 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.

—
Whitney Mam
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
—
Yanchen Qi
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 22% · published 3.5
3.24
Jennifer Potter
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.13
Steven Grant
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
3.03
Scott Dickinson
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3
3.00
Skip Potter
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 3
2.96
Heather Dale
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.76
Jonathan Guinn
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.67
Dave Hardman
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.21
Pamela Grant
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 2.5
—
Rachel Emery
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 0
Results8 ties
2021-11-13Won 2–1
W#1 DoublesJennifer Potter / Scott Dickinson vs Katherine McMillan / Lars Kasch6-1, 6-3
L#2 DoublesWhitney Mam / Skip Potter vs Jessica Dalpiaz / Brian Craighill7-6, 4-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesYanchen Qi / Jonathan Guinn vs Teufelin Traylen / Michael Jakola6-4, 6-1
2021-11-06Lost 0–2
L#1 DoublesWhitney Mam / Skip Potter vs Nicola Ash / Nick Hooker7-6, 6-2
L#3 DoublesHeather Dale / Jonathan Guinn vs Wendi Ouellette / Erik Bucher6-2, 6-4
2021-10-23Lost 0–2
L#1 DoublesPamela Grant / Steven Grant vs Rachel Young / Michael Sullivan6-0, 6-1
L#3 DoublesElizabeth Zamos / Jonathan Guinn vs Julian Pscheid / Laurel Soot6-0, 6-2
2021-10-09Lost 0–3
L#1 DoublesJennifer Thompson / Scott Dickinson vs Devin McMasters / Michele Sutherland6-0, 6-1
L#2 DoublesWhitney Mam / Skip Potter vs Sev Flores / Debbie Spitzer6-1, 6-1
L#3 DoublesJennifer Potter / Jonathan Guinn vs Suresh Chand / Erin Doucet6-1, 6-0
2021-10-02Lost 0–3
L#1 DoublesWhitney Mam / Skip Potter vs Heidi Palena / Robert Palena6-2, 6-3
L#2 DoublesScott Dickinson / Yanchen Qi vs Jean Pierre Belmar / Maryann Velez7-6, 7-6
L#3 DoublesHeather Dale / Dave Hardman vs Steven Darling / Stephanie Smith6-2, 6-1
2021-09-25Won 2–1
L#1 DoublesPamela Grant / Steven Grant vs Colleen Walker / William Seidl6-4, 6-1
W#2 DoublesYanchen Qi / Robert Ellis vs Laurel Hallock Koppelman / Joshua Lewis6-4, 6-3
W#3 DoublesHeather Dale / Jonathan Guinn vs Irene Gilbertson / Ken Naffziger6-3, 6-4
2021-09-18Lost 0–2
L#1 DoublesPamela Grant / Steven Grant vs Dan Tracy / Karla Hendrickson6-3, 6-3
L#2 DoublesYanchen Qi / Dave Hardman vs Scott Mandel / Megan Mandel6-4, 6-3
2021-09-11Won 3–0
W#1 DoublesWhitney Mam / Skip Potter vs Alice Phillips / Alireza Bayestehtashk6-1, 7-6
W#2 DoublesRachel Emery / Scott Dickinson vs Minnie Bautista / Brandon Coston6-4, 6-0
W#3 DoublesJennifer Thompson / Dave Hardman vs N/A6-0, 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.
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
Whitney Mam
30W–27L career
not enough data
—
3.5
Yanchen Qi
29W–55L career
not enough data
—
3.5
Jennifer Potter
38W–53L career
2%98%1%
3.24
3
Steven Grant
92W–60L career
0%44%56%
3.13
3
Scott Dickinson
106W–81L career · type A
0%76%24%
3.03
3
Skip Potter
43W–73L career
0%79%21%
3.00
3
Heather Dale
94W–94L career
0%89%11%
2.96
3
Jonathan Guinn
45W–76L career
1%98%1%
2.76
3
Dave Hardman
14W–34L career
12%86%1%
2.67
2.5
Pamela Grant
35W–45L career
0%95%5%
2.21
0
Rachel Emery
12W–7L career
not enough data
—

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.