Teams

ETC:Match Makers:Veres/Combe

2025 WMA Adult 18 & Over Women · 2.5 Women 1

12 players · average NTRP 2.75 / WESTERN MASSACHUSETTS

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 →
Schedule2 played
2024-11-17vs ETC:Honey Deuces :Garska/SignetWon 21
W#1 DoublesLauren Brady / Ashley Sadowsky vs Toni Wall / Samantha Root6-4, 6-4
L#1 SinglesAmy Veres vs Aimee Leventis3-6, 3-6
W#2 DoublesSarah Bombich / Abby Weaver vs Rani AThreya / Kimberly Okey6-4, 7-6
2024-09-28vs ETC:Honey Deuces :Garska/SignetWon 21
W#1 DoublesSarah Bombich / Amy Veres vs Cheryl Signet / Samantha Root4-6, 6-0, 6-1
W#1 SinglesMina Martin vs Toni Wall6-3, 6-1
L#2 DoublesNarae Mcmanus / Rachel Logan vs Tara Garstka / Udaya Jagadeesan6-0
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 standings for 2.5 Women 1 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 2.42 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.

2.97
Megan Scully
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Abby Weaver
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
Brenna Ching
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.66
Mina Martin
usually #3 Doubles 80%, also #1 Singles 20% · published
2.47
Rachel Logan
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.37
Ashley Sadowsky
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 2.5
2.34
Narae Mcmanus
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.22
Rachel Combe
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
2.19
Sarah Bombich
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
2.13
Amy Veres
usually #3 Doubles 33%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 2.5
Lauren Brady
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Urvi Patel
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.

Rachel Combe + Sarah Bombich3447% games+9.6% vs expected
Megan Scully + Mina Martin5550% games+5.4% vs expected
Amy Veres + Sarah Bombich2545% games−1.9% vs expected
Rachel Combe + Urvi Patel134 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.

Megan Scully
13W–8L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%57%43%
2.97
3
Abby Weaver
5W–2L career · 1 line in 2025
not enough data
3
Brenna Ching
7W–5L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
Mina Martin
12W–7L career · 5 lines in 2025
13%86%1%
2.66
Rachel Logan
4W–9L career · 1 line in 2025
0%59%41%
2.47
2.5
Ashley Sadowsky
9W–1L career · 1 line in 2025
0%83%17%
2.37
Narae Mcmanus
10W–10L career · 1 line in 2025
0%87%13%
2.34
Rachel Combe
20W–31L career · 2 lines in 2025
0%98%2%
2.22
Sarah Bombich
16W–26L career · 3 lines in 2025
0%99%1%
2.19
2.5
Amy Veres
10W–24L career · 3 lines in 2025
0%>99%<1%
2.13
Lauren Brady
1W–0L career · 1 line in 2025
not enough data
Urvi Patel
7W–6L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data

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.